pkgs and nses #5

New Issue

scott · 2023-12-14T01:27:24Z

kredati commented

2023-12-14 01:27:24 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

A module form could be interesting. It describes a namespace, but instead of an explicit associative data structure (as the ns form is currently), it would be followed by a block. It would then bundle up all the bindings in this block into an equivalent namespace.

The following would then be equivalent:

& current `ns` strategy: 
let foo = ...
let bar = ...
let baz = ...
ns Foobar { foo, bar, baz }

& new `module` strategy:
module Foobar {
    let foo = ...
    let bar = ...
    let baz = ...
}

This is not quite pure sugar: it relies on the plumbing of Ludus being able to do something with the context of the scope. But I think this is quite ergonomic.

Is module the right name for this?
Is ns actually the name for this?
Is the old ns strategy the right one now that we don't have structs?

A `module` form could be interesting. It describes a namespace, but instead of an explicit associative data structure (as the `ns` form is currently), it would be followed by a block. It would then bundle up all the bindings in this block into an equivalent namespace. The following would then be equivalent: ``` & current `ns` strategy: let foo = ... let bar = ... let baz = ... ns Foobar { foo, bar, baz } & new `module` strategy: module Foobar { let foo = ... let bar = ... let baz = ... } ``` This is not quite pure sugar: it relies on the plumbing of Ludus being able to do something with the context of the scope. But I think this is quite ergonomic. * [ ] Is `module` the right name for this? * [ ] Is `ns` actually the name for this? * [ ] Is the old `ns` strategy the right one now that we don't have structs?

kredati commented

2023-12-14 05:15:48 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Better names? A current ns should actually be a package, pkg; the module proposal here is more properly called a "namespace."

Better names? A current `ns` should actually be a _package_, `pkg`; the module proposal here is more properly called a "namespace."

scott self-assigned this 2023-12-15 21:25:22 +00:00

scott referenced this issue

2023-12-18 05:52:15 +00:00

Improve prelude #17

scott removed their assignment 2023-12-27 04:18:16 +00:00

scott commented

2024-04-29 22:14:53 +00:00

The revised, current strategy:

& a package, `pkg`: 
let foo = ...
let bar = ...
let baz = ...
pkg Foobar { foo, bar, baz }

& a namespace, `ns`:
ns Foobar {
    let foo = ...
    let bar = ...
    let baz = ...
}

A namespace is a package; it exports all first-level bindings into the package.

Packages must have capitalized names; unlike dicts, they panic if you try to access a key that isn't on them.

Only packages may be used with the use form: use Foobar, above, would load foo, bar, and baz into the local scope. use may also only be used at the toplevel.

The revised, current strategy: ``` & a package, `pkg`: let foo = ... let bar = ... let baz = ... pkg Foobar { foo, bar, baz } & a namespace, `ns`: ns Foobar { let foo = ... let bar = ... let baz = ... } ``` A namespace is a package; it exports all first-level bindings into the package. Packages must have capitalized names; unlike dicts, they panic if you try to access a key that isn't on them. Only packages may be used with the `use` form: `use Foobar`, above, would load `foo`, `bar`, and `baz` into the local scope. `use` may also only be used at the toplevel.

scott referenced this issue

2024-04-29 22:15:46 +00:00

Improve namespaces #4

scott commented

2024-05-14 22:59:27 +00:00

Accepted, and implemented in scanner, parser, validator.

scott changed title from ~~To consider: a `module` form~~ to `pkg`s and `ns`es

2024-05-19 19:26:50 +00:00

scott added this to the Computer Class milestone 2024-05-19 19:26:52 +00:00

scott referenced this issue

2024-05-19 19:54:42 +00:00

Improve namespaces #4

scott commented

2024-05-30 23:41:41 +00:00

Current status, good enough for Computer Class, I think:

pkg works and is validated.
ns access does not pass validation, and is not yet implemented in the interpreter.
pkg access, e.g. Foo :bar is validated properly.
pkgs are not (yet) implemented in the interpreter.

Current status, good enough for Computer Class, I think: * `pkg` works and is validated. * `ns` access does not pass validation, and is not yet implemented in the interpreter. * pkg access, e.g. `Foo :bar` is validated properly. * pkgs are not (yet) implemented in the interpreter.

scott modified the milestone from Computer Class to 0.2.0

2024-05-31 16:40:10 +00:00

scott added this to the Completing the language project 2024-07-21 17:45:44 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.