aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-08-04 01:12:30 +0200
committerThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-08-04 01:12:30 +0200
commit426419a9c257be96bd9b3e519bd0591bbf2b4d9c (patch)
tree9a0151301e41a330430928cd671b0589cd49a77b
parent4b8318aed38de0372f5d249359f2455435776cc3 (diff)
Add a NOTES file
-rw-r--r--NOTES46
1 files changed, 46 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/NOTES b/NOTES
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..67228e1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/NOTES
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+This file contains various notes about the Oryx language and language
+design more generally that I have compiled over my time developing the
+Oryx ecosystem. These are mostly just for myself to remember in the
+future, as well as the potential interest of others.
+
+1. Unified logical- and bitwise operators is a potentially bad idea.
+ After a few attempts at unifying these seemingly similar operators
+ (‘|’ and ‘||’, ‘&’ and ‘&&’, etc.) I have concluded that it makes
+ little sense.
+
+ The first argument is that when you see ‘a & b’ you assume that both
+ sides of the argument are being evaluated while you assume
+ short-circuiting in ‘a && b’.
+
+ Another issue I came to realize is one that occurs when you consider
+ the fact that bitwise-NOT is merely the unary version of bitwise-XOR¹
+ (similar to how you have both a unary- and binary-minus). This means
+ that a NOT and an XOR would look like ‘~a’ and ‘a ~ b’ respectively.
+ This is fine until you merge bitwise- and logical-NOT. All of a
+ sudden you get ambiguity when you see ‘a ~= b’. Is this a compound
+ assignment that expands to ‘a = a ~ b’, or is it a logical not-equals
+ operation between ‘a’ and ‘b’?
+
+ ¹ This is an observation made by both Go and Odin. Odin does use ‘~’
+ for both operations. Go on the otherhand retains ‘^’ for XOR and ‘~’
+ for bitwise-negation, but it does have an AND-NOT operator
+ represented by ‘&^’, the operators for AND and… XOR. Likewise
+ LLVM IR does not even include an operator to perform a bitwise
+ negation, instead requiring the user to express it as the XOR of your
+ to-be-negated oprand and 1.
+
+2. Prefixless functions à la Jai are not a good idea. Take the simple
+ example of ‘f :: (a: int) (int, int)’. What is ‘f’? It seem to be a
+ function that takes an integer and returns two integers, but this
+ could actually also be a function that takes an integer and returns a
+ new function that accepts 2 integers and returns nothing. With a
+ function prefix this ambiguity is solved:
+
+ f :: func (a: int) (int, int);
+ f :: func (a: int) func (int, int);
+
+ Additionally this allows for consistent syntax between functions and
+ macros:
+
+ addf :: func (a, b: int) int { return a + b; }
+ addm :: macro (a, b: int) int { return a + b; }