/prog/ - Flow lang

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-30 13:33

http://www.flowlang.net/p/flow-manifesto.html
What you think of its feature set? Can it be some alternative to C++?

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 18:55

Um, quicksort?

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 19:08

>>36
Having an uneducated opinion on a topic isn't worth much compared with a recognised subject authority. Authorities on a subject have proven themselves by attaining a certain level of knowledge or even imparting new knowledge. This specific authority is a pioneer in the subject of CS and thus, deserves respect in his opinions on CS matters.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 19:18

>>42
Not really. Suck a dick, faggot.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 20:08

NullPointerException

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 4:50

>>41
Quicksort isn't a rocket science.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 4:53

>>42
Hitler was an expert on jewish question. He should be respected.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 11:56

>>45

Quicksort is computer science.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 13:06

>>47
4/10

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 13:23

computer science isn't a rocket science.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 13:25

Computer so-called ``science'' actually has a lot in common with magic. Now sage your posts.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 18:02

>>22
You're really complaining about static, _explicitly_-typed languages. Static, _implicitly_-typed languages don't have the syntax problems you mention.

Also the fact that static typing makes the developer sit around and think instead of hacking away is a feature, not a bug. If this is not appropriate to what you're doing then by all means use a dynamically typed language.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 18:31

>>51
_*_
We have ^B_B~~^{C^o}_{d_e}~~ here, generic redditor.

Also, this is what you're looking for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_inference, there are no ``explicitly'' or ``implicitly'' typed languages.

Name: sage 2011-05-02 18:57

>>52
I don't typically use reddit. Do you think reddit invented _those_ *kinds* of convention? I'm not interested in playing markup oneupmanship, just adding some light emphasis.

In addition I'd argue that the difference between 'implicit typing' vs 'type inference' and 'explicit typing' vs 'manifest typing' (which appears in your link) is a matter of terminology. I don't see why you'd want to spend energy discussing it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 19:54

>>53

You're wrong and you're not mature enough to admit it, please leave /prog/ and never come back.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 23:03

>>54
Winning at the Internets...

( ≖‿≖)

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:28

>>51
Static, _implicitly_-typed languages don't have the syntax problems you mention.
Nope. My quote was about Haskell and the likes. The "Syntax of typed languages tends to be more complicated" part is directly from TAPL, meaning that even Haskell apologists admit that it's complicated, compared to LISP.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:30

Also, C++0x has type inference and still it's complicate as hell (requires 10-20 years to master).

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:33

Implicit typing is guessing what presents you should get, assuming the present to be something you like anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:45

Glasgow Santa Claus

Flow lang

1 Name: Anonymous 2011-04-30 13:33

41 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 18:55

42 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 19:08

43 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 19:18

44 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-01 20:08

45 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 4:50

46 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 4:53

47 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 11:56

48 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 13:06

49 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 13:23

50 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 13:25

51 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 18:02

52 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 18:31

53 Name: sage 2011-05-02 18:57

54 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 19:54

55 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-02 23:03

56 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:28

57 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:30

58 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:33

59 Name: Anonymous 2011-05-03 3:45