schism VS cant

I don't know why you've been downvoted, I've given you an upvote for linking to an interesting project (even if it's linked in some way to Google). I'd also like to link to the updated GH link: <https://github.com/schism-lang/schism>.

Looks like Schism (https://github.com/schism-lang/schism) got part of the way there, but it unfortunately seems to be dead.

It would be interesting to reboot something like Lush but using Wasm and Scheme with https://github.com/schism-lang/schism then you could use code generation internally be emitting wasm from your schism code and then reloading the entire environment.

I love E! Or at least the problems it is trying to solve. As you know Wasm also has a capabilities model. And it is fairly trivial to persist the Wasm heap, it just an array of bytes. I think Wasm aligns nicely.

Chez is a great Scheme, but it doesn't have a Wasm backend. I find https://github.com/schism-lang/schism very interesting.

As for C programs going crazy, well yeah. I did a thing where I would copy of the body of functions around in memory, it worked on some version of Linux and GCC, but only by accident. I would be much less comfortable doing this kind of circuit bending than modifying Python stack frames. If I were to achieve a similar goal in the future, I'd use TCC, generate C code and compile directly into memory.

Framehacks aren't going to do the same thing, and one should have tests for it regardless. Framehacks get you tail calls, stack scope and a bunch of other nice properties.

Happy Hacking!

There is a WIP unofficial project from developers at Google called Schism [1].

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

That was one of the short examples in Norvig's Python program-design course for Udacity. https://github.com/darius/cant/blob/master/library/regex-gen... (I don't have the Python handy.)

> figure out a way to do upward movement that doesn’t require annoying special casing. If you figure it out, don’t tell me since it means I’ll have to make more levels.

Don't read this, then: https://github.com/darius/cant/blob/master/examples/games/20...

As long as I'm commenting, here are some links to other console Sokobans I thought were fun (listed in the source code to mine). The sed one is nuts -- I had no idea it could do that: https://github.com/darius/cant/blob/master/examples/games/20...

I've done AoC using my own language before. As a task it's at a sweet spot for finding weaknesses in the language/library/implementation: real and varied enough to exercise your system, small chunks of work, lots of code to compare yours to, with fun and competitive juices.

The first time I did it it forced me to fix some major problems. My language would still be a handicap for me in the state it's in (though I did get on the leaderboard a couple times using it).

fwiw: https://github.com/darius/cant (haven't done this year's so far)

I've used my own hobby language Cant before, for a couple reasons: it's meant to be enjoyable to code in (at least for me), and tackling random problems like this is a good way to drive some improvements to it.

Also similar: the 'for' expression in Cant (search for "syntax: for").

Darius Bacon wrote a version of this in https://github.com/darius/cant/blob/master/library/factoring... where the "frontier" of active riders is stored in a hash table rather than a bin heap, which is almost certainly a more efficient approach. But he's not doing the bitmaps.

Thank you!

I dislike style nazis too, e.g. carping when Peter Norvig's code won't pass PEP 8.

I'm just leery of the expected cost in this kind of case. It can go on working for years until some new complication or some change in the ecosystem makes it suddenly create a really weird problem. Or when you want to try moving to a fancy new Python implementation, you find you have this friction. Matter of judgement where some chance of such messes is paid for by what it can do for you. (Of course when it's less "load bearing" the balance shifts.) With https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/stable/ for example, it used bytecode hacks to do something you couldn't do otherwise, and that's unlikely to mess you up.

I have had old C programs go crazy years later in a really hard to debug way because newer compilers may interpret your code like your ex-wife's divorce lawyer (as Kragen put it, iirc). Back in the day a lot of us thought we had a different kind of relationship with C compilers, and it'd be fine to code to that informal social contract. (Just a loose analogy.)

I'm piddling away at https://github.com/darius/cant these days. (Some of the motivation was feeling too confined by Python, actually.) No Wasm, but I'm happy it exists! I tried to make a system like it 20 years ago (Idel) and gave up too soon.

Agreed. I used a few Rosetta Code problems in https://github.com/darius/cant/tree/master/examples and https://github.com/darius/cant/tree/master/library, but Rosetta is mostly things I don't care about.

Just for fun I tried it on my own toy language that nobody but me uses -- going to the limit in nicheness. E.g. Project Oiler problem #1 -- it's very wrong, but no shame in that.