bluebird VS star

0 upto n and 0 thru n. I think I saw it in Bluebird first and really liked it.

Instead of the classic visitor pattern, I found it easier to create a class that basically wraps a big switch statement that switches on an enum representing the kind of expression. You pass it an expression, and based on the enum returned by its kind() function you downcast the expression into the subclass you need. The code is here for reference. My AST code is here.

I am working some again on my Ada-like language bluebird. I am making another attempt to use MLIR as an intermediate IR between the AST and LLVM IR (I made a brief attempt a few months ago just to look into it).

I fworked some more towards adding pointers on my Ada-like programming language bluebird. I've finished adding pointer types and variables (as well as the operators for dereferencing/getting the address of objects), but I still need to add the ability to dereference and assign.

I started to experiment with using MLIR to write a high-level IR for my language bluebird, which will hopefully reduce the work of implementing features I want to add such as generics and ranges, as well as allowing me to eventually write some optimizations. I am also considering rewriting my AST as an MLIR dialect, since MLIR provides a bunch of type-checking/error printing/support infrastructure.

I continued implementing support for references (a restricted form of pointers) in my Ada-like language bluebird. I also am working on adding a cleanup pass between my parser/typechecker to handle stuff like type resolution of literals and constant folding.

I didn’t add too many new features to my Ada-like language bluebird this month because of lots of projects/school stuff.

Here is a link to my optimizer pass setup for reference. This is just a simple optimization pipeline (I think clang has a setup where optimization stages are re-run multiple times to take advantage of inlining making more optimizations possible).

I made some more progress on bluebird, my Ada-like language.

I continued to make progress on the compiler for my Ada-inspired language bluebird. I will have less time to spend on it as classes began earlier last month, but I still hope to continue working on it. Things are getting to the point where adding a new feature isn’t as difficult as it was when doing so often meant writing the supporting code from nothing.

my own language Star! enjoyability is one of my main goals with the language, along with the "powerful, productive, and predictable" line

This is actually done by several bootstrapped languages, such as Crystal, Nim, Raku, and even my own language Star

In Star, commas and newlines are analogous everywhere, even inside array literals. This actually solves the issue of trailing commas by not needing commas at all

I really like Nemerle's OOP+FP hybrid model, and I've taken a lot of it to heart while designing my language Star, which is similar in spirit.

Most languages are afraid to for some reason, most likely because it "breaks tradition" or whatever. The only languages I'm aware of that allow this are Hack (for C-like enums) and my language Star (for both C-like and OCaml-like enums)

It's currently a work-in-progress, mainly due to subtyping issues with generics (which I'm honestly too lazy to fix rn, focusing on other stuff first). the code is located here, although be aware that it's a bit messy lol

Making lots of progress on Star's typechecker, which has been very difficult due to its expansive type system. Although still not completely finished or useable, it does at least work a bit. Currently need to implement type variable expansion/substitution, "lazy" type refinement (because I have no clue what else to call it), and some basic support for existentials

I think this is referred to as partial or lazy initialization. I have this feature in my own language Star (which us null-safe), but I don't have an actual null literal for this purpose

Sure I guess, here's one for Star: ``` You appear to be advocating a new: [X] functional [X] imperative [X] object-oriented [ ] procedural [ ] stack-based [X] "multi-paradigm" [ ] lazy [ ] eager [X] statically-typed [ ] dynamically-typed [ ] pure [X] impure [ ] non-hygienic [ ] visual [X] beginner-friendly [ ] non-programmer-friendly [ ] completely incomprehensible programming language. Your language will not work. Here is why it will not work.

Hello, I'm the developer of the Star programming language, and I have some questions about how to typecheck several new/uncommon features that it has, and looking for feedback on it in general.