I heard many rust people not happy with rust choice of "unsafe" keyword, and jakt have same keyword, what you think about that? is that real problem and is there better word for that concept
i feel like almost all of those indentations could be solved by inverting the condition in the if and returning early and then leaving the actual code in the normal indent level
I don't know if anyone mentioned this yet, but in zig you can add with wraparound with +%
yeah, that was me 🙂 (checked/unchecked). I've needed this in C# before
Are there any features in other languages that you would like to implement in Jakt?
manually pulling out bytes (with helpers) seems nicer than casting memory and then swapping endianness in place even in C imho
the trade off between functionality and simplicity is a big part. having things be too simple you can lose the ability to customise and expand.
I think rust is good for the programming language ecosystem and the evolution of programming. I imagine programming languages 50 years from now will differently from languages and new ideas help pave
I feel like a language should be simple to write and just get your ideas to a MVP. let the language handle the fiddly parts and you can come back and tweak them as needed.
rust has some nice features but it throws you off in every way at the beginning
Rust is the programming equivalent of a vegan
Rust people would tell you that even a sophisticated enough reference lifetime system would prevent you from doing what this FooId thingy allows :P
Example where two distinct keywords probably wouldn't have hurt: static and static
Better than verbose expressive keywords is: very few keywords
not sure how you can split Scope to multiple classes, a scope is a scope 🤔
Thank you for all the excellent videos! I'm also learning about writing languages. How do you resolve identifiers in nested scopes in Jakt?
What do you recommend to study for developing a programming language to beginners?
When the language server asks the compiler where a definition of a type. Do you traverse the typed AST or do you save all the types somewhere.
Talking about compilers, are there any goals of including a compiler in the base system?
Hi @Andreas Kling ! I've seen you've published some opinions on Rust recently on twitter. Have you been using it?
i do believe that explanation of goals/benefits for borrow-checking made sense. now its on me to decide if in my project it is worth the (potentially and likely minute) performance benefit...
The borrow checker is effectively language support for things like unique_ptr that make it easier to read. Like how Kotlin and others with null coalescence replace the use of null checks/optionals. (another message) You can always throw reference counted pointers at the borrow checker if it’s bothering you 😉
personally, programming with a borrow checker is just... difficult for me to wrap my head around, and additionally, i don't believe it benefits me in the projects i create...i agree with a more memory-safe programming language, but a borrow checker seems like a weird way about it. i certainly might not know enough though, maybe i'm bad at rust still :^)
Hi Andreas, I saw your tweet about reducing the include graph for ast.h, would this be something that could be done by jakt’s transpiler?
why all big tech companies started pushing rust recently? And do you think c++ is a bad choice to start a new project?