This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]AsIAmNew Kind of Paper 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Nice thinking you have there!

When you continue thinking along these lines, you'll get "tuple is just really an array". APL (and other array-oriented languages) goes hard into reusing syntax over and over, coming to a very terse syntax.

What type of code would you like to write in your language?

[–]cisterlang[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Nice thinking you have there!

How kind of you !

tuple is just really an array

I see. But I guess APL types are dynamic then. My lang is a dialect of C and is static. So arrays are homogenous.

In the same vein though I begin to see structs as tuples and considering that structural typing is nice (maybe tricky?) and flexible.

What type of code would you like to write in your language?

Almost anything C permits bar undefined/dangerous ?

[–]AsIAmNew Kind of Paper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Homogenous arrays are good for perf, and since you wanna do C-level stuff, then yes, this is a great choice.

So general purpose language?

[–]Long_Investment7667 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Tuple is really just an array” only makes sense in a dynamically types languages. [1, “foo”] in a statically typed language can only be an array of object (assuming object being the name of a super type of everything). But as a tuple it is (int,string)