roc VS Jinx

Their FAQ is an eminently reasonable breakdown of their choices:

https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/blob/main/FAQ.md

I don't fully agree with all of the reasoning, but it's a reasonable position to stake.

If you forget what parametrisation and functions are, then Roc's modules look like they actually do that.

Reminds me of: https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/blob/main/FAQ.md#why-doesnt-...

> How would a user interface written in a functional language look?

Maybe you're not aware of Elm?

https://elm-lang.org

Elm is really functional, unlike the likes of React that are just partially, kind of functional.

There's an attempt at bringing Elm to the desktop, the Roc language... here's an UI example written in Roc:

https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/blob/main/examples/gui/hello...

What are your thoughts on the direct descendant, Roc? [0] I know it's pre v0.1 so maybe you don't have any, but as a fellow Elm lover it seems pretty compelling on the surface albeit less directly frontend-dev focused.

[0] https://github.com/roc-lang/roc

I might be misunderstanding something, but, for example, look at this "host"/platform: https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/blob/main/examples/cli/tui-platform/host.zig

You are not alone. The other day I was checking out a new programming language and the author rewrote the unsafe rust part to zig: https://github.com/roc-lang/roc/blob/main/FAQ.md#why-does-ro...

Check out Roc[0][1] by Richard Feldman; it's early-stages (perhaps earlier stages than Elm?) but from everything I've seen it looks a bit like a spiritual successor to Elm, though focused more on native applications (but still seems to have its sights set on webassembly support too)

[0] https://www.roc-lang.org

[1] https://github.com/roc-lang/roc

Check out jinx https://jamesboer.github.io/Jinx/

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of automated tests where it makes sense. I wrote a scripting language that I use for my personal game projects, and I never would have been able to do it if it weren't for the battery of tests for every feature, error, and corner case I could think of. But games are rarely like other software, with hard rules about what is "correct" or "incorrect". And it would be a nightmare to try to keep up with designers, constantly tweaking and tuning, so what's "correct" is literally a day to day, constantly moving target.

A second trial for you might be Jinx. Depending on your definition of procedural, Jinx is 100% only procedural. https://jamesboer.github.io/Jinx/

Jinx (embeddable scripting language) works as following:

Feel free to look at my own interpreter, written in modern C++. You're welcome to ask me if you have any questions.

I use my own scripting language more like content, especially for things like one-off events and behaviors. Example: scripting special behaviors for a boss fight, or a room with a unique trap in it, or any other sort of one-off behavior that would be overkill for C++, but too complex for most other types of data-driven content. These days, visual scripting also helps to fill in these gaps between content and procedure.

You're welcome to look at my scripting language Jinx, written in modern C++. Just let me know if you have specific questions. Data flow is JxLexer.cpp -> JxParser.cpp -> JxScript.cpp. Most everything else is implementation details. Also, note the parer is pretty complex, mostly because Jinx has a crazily flexible syntax for functions.

Feel free to look at Jinx if you want an example of what I consider a fairly easy-to-use and integrate scripting system. Obviously, I'm a bit biased since I wrote it.

If you're working in UTF-8 internally, you could just write your own UTF-16 to UTF-8 conversion functions to convert strings at API boundaries. I did this in my scripting language because I didn't want to bring in dependencies.