News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Problems of C, and how Zig addresses them. Parent comment

Re:Problems of C, and how Zig addresses them by luckystarr on Monday July 03, 2023 @02:53PM (#36577329)
What was the language which used backticks to transform any function into an infix binary operator? Ruby? Perl?

Something like this could actually fulfill Andrews goal of not having any hidden control flow, as the function would be plainly visible.

The other thing of course would be, what then the valid function names would be? Definitely not `*` but probably `×` or whatever.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Problems of C, and how Zig addresses them by chrisoverzero on Monday July 03, 2023 @03:05PM (#36577442)
> What was the language which used backticks to transform any function into an infix binary operator? Ruby? Perl?

Haskell.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Problems of C, and how Zig addresses them by tyg13 on Monday July 03, 2023 @03:06PM (#36577457)
Haskell does this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Problems of C, and how Zig addresses them by rscho on Monday July 03, 2023 @03:12PM (#36577526)
Racket
[ Parent | on HN ]