World: r3wp
[Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3097x2] | Wow! :-) |
I see now what you meant by making dialects in Red/System! | |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3099] | I am surprised myself at how far you can get. I'm pretty certain this is now the most concise and efficient GTK binding in existence |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3100] | That's really a smart use of 'typed function attribute. |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3101] | Thanks :-) |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3102] | Is 'fixed a function call in the dialect? |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3103x2] | Yes |
So it's a sort of static dialect. Red dialects will be much more dynamic | |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3105x2] | That's very nice work Kaj! |
What was the audience reaction about that? | |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3107x2] | Thanks. I've been talking about such techniques for many years in Syllable and in general, and nobody will ever believe me. I'm very happy to now have a tool to show them |
The audience... sigh. They were friends, but there was only one programmer, formerly C++ and now Python. I asked him beforehand how long he thought his equivalent Python program would be. He didn't seem to be much into GUI programming, but he maintained it would be only ten lines... | |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3109] | How big is the GTK dialect implemenation? |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3110x3] | If that is so, it is in some mystery Python binding that is hidden very well. In the known PyGTK binding, it would be 2.5 to 3 times as long, with a lot of boilerplate code inbetween |
The binding is currently 900 lines. The dialect implementation is 300 of that, but almost half of it is not used in this example | |
It will become much bigger when you support significant parts of GTK | |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3113] | Do you think that adding a symbol! type would be a big help for building such dialects at this point? |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3114x10] | Yes, but it occurred to me a day or two ago that it can be done simpler, if you support first class constants, which I would like anyway |
The gtk-position-center is the only #define in the example, the other words are function calls | |
So it's an integer, while there are already two integers for the size. Because they can be required to be adjacent, you can detect one more integer if it's at the proper distance of the pair, but that's the limit | |
You also have to use a complicated word, because defines of simple words could mess up the program elsewhere | |
To use center instead of gtk-position-center, you'd have to do: | |
center: 1 | |
for example and then check for that code. But you'd get a manual sort of symbol table that would take space | |
If you could do | |
center: constant 1 | |
and have constants be real types that you can check for, you'd be able to stretch simple dialects a lot further | |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3124x2] | Supporting first class constants would require to duplicate all existing types... I was thinking recently about adding a PROTECT keyword that would allow to mark any variable as immutable, so they would act as constants. But I guess that such option wouldn't help much for dialects, unless I would also add a PROTECTED? keyword to detect them. |
Also, some kind of namespace support should also help implement more cleanly Red/System-level dialects. I might need that too for Red's runtime as it will grow much bigger than initially planned, due to Red compiling to Red/System. | |
Gregg 4-Sep-2011 [3126] | Very nice Kaj! |
Henrik 4-Sep-2011 [3127] | cool, Kaj |
Kaj 4-Sep-2011 [3128x6] | Thanks |
Doc, for dialects I only need constant integers. The immutability doesn't matter much, so it's more like the symbol! you suggested, but with control over the internal value | |
Namespaces would be good, too | |
Enumerations would also help; they're sort of a namespace type for constants | |
Note that to make the dialects more powerful, I'm making use of GTK's object system, that allows you to check types. So I can distinguish between different Red structs | |
If you would want to support that in Red/System itself, you'd need some sort of user defined type | |
Dockimbel 4-Sep-2011 [3134] | I think that extending the RTTI system to distinguish different type of structs (or at least aliased structs) should be doable without that. Aliases are already a form of user-defined type. |
Andreas 4-Sep-2011 [3135] | Very nice Kaj, congrats! |
GrahamC 5-Sep-2011 [3136x2] | Looks like we'll all have to install Syllable! |
How's the Red timetable going? | |
PeterWood 5-Sep-2011 [3138x4] | Tick-tock. |
Yes, very nice Kaj. | |
Nenad keeps the status updated on the RoadMap http://www.red-lang.org/p/roadmap.html Since taking the decision for Red to compile to Red/System code, Nenad has been spending additional time extending Red/System to be able to do so. It will probably result in less work being needed on the first Red static compiler. | |
Having more people testing red/system would probably help speed things up a little. | |
Dockimbel 5-Sep-2011 [3142] | Agreed with Peter, as Red/System becomes more important now, it needs to be strengthen a bit more. I will publish an updated roadmap duing the SFD event in two weeks. |
Kaj 5-Sep-2011 [3143] | Detecting aliases would be very nice. It would replace GTK's RTTI, which is complex and buggy, and obviously wouldn't work cross-toolkit |
Dockimbel 6-Sep-2011 [3144x3] | Kaj: I have added in the last commit a new virtual path for querying aliases unique ID value: system/alias/<name> The system/alias/... paths are replaced during compilation with a unique ID that should match the one passed for "typed" functions. So now you basically have RTTI on aliases too. |
As it might be a bit verbose in some cases, macros would be welcome to shorten them. In such case, the convention of a "type-" prefix on the alias name would be a good one to follow (will document that in the spec later today). | |
I also plan to add a SWITCH function soon, maybe before the SFD. It should be able to resolve alias names without the system/alias/ path prefix. | |
older newer | first last |