boba VS Cwerg

I've done a small implementation, used in type inference, in my language Boba. And you are correct, I used the linear equation solving method.

The vast majority of October's improvements on Boba were type system and runtime bug fixes. In particular, the effect handler/delimited continuation semantics were hopelessly busted beyond a few simple examples I'd fixated on.

September was another productive month for Boba, which is starting to get more 'quality of life' improvements rather than broad new features. That doesn't make the work less important: one of the bug fixes to the type inference engine last month caught a previously unseen bug in the core Boba libraries!

Also worth checking out is Adam Gundry's work on type inference for UoM types. Or, if you want an example implementation of the Abelian unification used in standard type inference extended with UoM types, you can reference my implementation, based on solving linear equations.

August was a surprisingly productive month for the Boba compiler. A few highlights:

The next large feature for Boba (a general-purpose concatenative language) is language integrated property tests.

That's a good question! I wrote up some of my thoughts on the benefits of Go as a backend, but there's also a historical component here. The first backend I was experimenting with was compile-to-C plus a C-based runtime. Go was closer to C than C# for what I needed at the time and I thought had a nicer concurrency story as a backend.

Perhaps these have already been dealt with and I'm missing critical information. If so, my apologies. Great work, in any case.

[1] https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/FrontEnd#dis...

Cwerg has backend that can be used as JIT and is written with readability in mind. Additional documentation can be found here: https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/Docs

I defined a basic ISA-like IR for Cwerg. It has unlimited registers and no constraints on immediates.

entire compiler front end ast nodes

I was also going down the path of bike shedding concrete syntax for my language Cwerg before pulling the plug on that effort and just using s-exprs. I managed to make the s-expr quite succinct by carefully choosing the order of arguments so I can omit optional ones. Also very helpful was to use square brackets for list, e.g. (call fun-name [arg1 arg2]). This simplifies parsing a little bit and is easier on the eye. Here are some Code Examples

I am iterating over the languages features for Cwerg's Frontend which aims to be a low level language with about the complexity of C but with some of the comforts of modern languages. I am especially happy with the choice of adding sum types. Relative to C the current feature set looks like this: Removed: * arrays decay to pointers * bitfields * separate compilation (more of a backend issue) * pre-processor * varargs * implcit type conversions * (untagged) unions * ++/-- * comma operator * implicitly nullable pointers * goto