excoptional
circle
excoptional | circle | |
---|---|---|
5 | 55 | |
11 | 2,189 | |
- | - | |
0.0 | 5.0 | |
over 2 years ago | 6 months ago | |
HTML | C++ | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 only | - |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
excoptional
-
From ES6 to Scala: Basics
> I mean Scala because I guess it actually has it, but worth pointing out it's like 30 LOC to define one for JS, depending on how many convenience methods you want.
Here's one I wrote: https://github.com/sbernheim4/excoptional
I fully believe it to be one of the best Option implementations in JS/TS
- Understanding the Power of Lisp (2020)
-
[AskJS] How often do you use the ES6+(ES7, ES8, ES9 and ES10) syntax? Do you like it? Does it help?
https://github.com/sbernheim4/excoptional is an option object for js/ts
-
Functors, Applicatives, and Monads in Pictures
One benefit to keeping your value wrapped in a Maybe is that as you transform and manipulate the value and pass it around in your system, you leave it up to the last place in your system that uses the value to define the fallback value in the case of a None rather than defining a fallback value part way through and establish a convention that the fallback value means nothing was found at some other part of your system.
Another benefit to using Maybes is that you avoid the rigamarole of null checks at every call site where you want to use the value. If you have a function that returns null or a value, whenever you call that function you'll always have to add an if guard to validate it's not null. If it is, that function itself may return null, and callers to it will again have to implement the same check.
I wrote a JS implementation of the Option object and the readme has lots of specific examples about these benefits: https://github.com/sbernheim4/excoptional
- Show HN: An Option Object for JavaScript and TypeScript
circle
- Rusty.hpp: A Borrow Checker and Memory Ownership System for C++20
-
How difficult would it be to make a c++ compiler
Sean Baxter created a front end c++ compiler by himself, using llvm for the back end and the gcc or clang stl. I think it took him a couple of years. https://www.circle-lang.org/. Before this happened I heard a couple of different people claiming that there would never be a totally new compiler as it was too much work.
-
Toward a TypeScript for C++"
The real Typescript for C++ is Circle.
https://www.circle-lang.org/
Just like Typescript to JavaScript, the syntax is an evolution of what already exists, not a completely different syntax.
-
A Metaobject Protocol for C++ [pdf]
Sean Baxter's Circle [1] is arguably the spiritual successor to MOP.
[1] https://www.circle-lang.org/
-
Circle Evolves C++ [video]
Context: https://github.com/seanbaxter/circle/blob/master/new-circle/...
Note that Circle is not an F/OSS compiler as someone pointed out before. This however doesn't make Circle less relevant, because it is actually a testament to show that C++ could have been much better without the claimed breakage. If Circle does provide a number of desirable features and its compiler can be built by a single person, then why shouldn't the committee do the same?
-
My (Herb Sutter's) C++ Now 2023 talk is online: “A TypeScript for C++”
From all wannabe C++ replacements candidates, the only language that is really a TypeScript for C++, is Circle.
For whatever reason, Herb Sutter decided to ignore this language on the presentation.
https://www.circle-lang.org/
This is the only one with the syntax based on C++, incrementally changing the features via #pragma settings.
"Circle Fixes Defects, Makes C++ Language Safer & More Productive"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7fxeNqSK2k
"Circle Evolves C++"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ZDOGDMNLM
- File for Divorce from LLVM
-
Making C++ Safe Without Borrow Checking, Reference Counting, or Tracing GC
The second someone makes a successor language that seamlessly/directly interops with C++ _AND_ has the level of build/IDE tooling that C++/Rust have, I'm on board.
The closest thing right now is Sean Baxter's "Circle" compiler in "Carbon" mode IMO:
https://github.com/seanbaxter/circle/blob/master/new-circle/...
Unfortunately, Circle is closed-source and there's no LSP or other tooling to make the authoring experience nice.
- Circle-lang: A feasible, simple, and immediate way for C++ to break out of the rut it's been in. Surprised more people aren't talking about it.
-
Recurrence-expression is a programmable superset of fold-expression
I read through the whole of https://github.com/seanbaxter/circle/blob/master/new-circle/README.md and man, I'm drooling. Awesome work, kudos.
What are some alternatives?
sicp - HTML5/EPUB3 version of SICP
raspberry-pi-os - Learning operating system development using Linux kernel and Raspberry Pi
Chimney - Scala library for boilerplate-free, type-safe data transformations
dts2hx - Converts TypeScript definition files (d.ts) to haxe externs (.hx) via the TypeScript compiler API
diode - Scala library for managing immutable application model
mdspan - Reference implementation of mdspan targeting C++23
whirlisp - A whirlwind Lisp adventure
papers - ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21 paper scheduling and management
mostly-adequate-guide - Mostly adequate guide to FP (in javascript)
CppCoreGuidelines - The C++ Core Guidelines are a set of tried-and-true guidelines, rules, and best practices about coding in C++
tyrian - Elm-inspired Scala UI library.
meta