Re:The Zimbu programming language
by otabdeveloper on Tuesday December 27, 2016 @01:25AM
(#13261633)
> "code is read more than it is written"
Is that really true? An amazing amount of absolutely mission-critical infrastructure runs on code that was written once and probably never even code-reviewed.
Re:The Zimbu programming language
by qwertyuiop924 on Monday December 26, 2016 @03:31PM
(#13259635)
Nim... urgh. It's a bit quirky, bit kind of nice.
The really ugly bit is the macro system: Nim macros are awful.
> The really ugly bit is the macro system: Nim macros are awful.
If I had a penny for every time I see you say that on HN... :)
In any case, I disagree with you. Nim macros are really easy to work with, the AST construction is a bit verbose but that can be easily remedied by writing functions which make the construction easier.
Re:The Zimbu programming language
by qwertyuiop924 on Monday December 26, 2016 @04:54PM
(#13259974)
I do say it a lot. But it is true.
>that can be easily remedied by writing functions which make the construction easier.
That can only really go so far...
You keep repeating that without describing how in comparison to other languages.
Re:The Zimbu programming language
by qwertyuiop924 on Monday December 26, 2016 @04:56PM
(#13259987)
Actually, I've gone into quite a bit of depth about how it fares in comparison to other languages. :-)
You can go look up the comments, if you like. I can't do another writeup on it at the moment, sorry to say.
However, 2 improvements that could be made are:
1) being able to write the code as normal (if instead of IF, else instead of ELSE) and then using something like:
zu.fmt
To format the code (best of both worlds?)
2) Dropping the ending-brace. It will just lead to many errors that could otherwise be avoided
---
Also, if you are interested in a similar language, maybe Nim might be worth a look:
http://nim-lang.org/