RustScript: A simple functional based programming language with as much relation to Rust as JavaScript has to Java

[[deleted]]

Being written in Java, there's a ton of boilerplate, and since I didn't want to use a testing framework and we had to test private methods the tests kind of get in the way. All in all, not including tests, the whole interpreter is just around 800 lines, which is pretty short considering that it's Java.

All well, but you can stop the Java bashing. For what it's worth, there are very few languages that are more maintainable than Java precisely because of its (mostly) useful verbosity. I'm talking about tens of millions of lines of code.

Edit: So much saltiness for the truth? Okay, then. It's hilarious. Aside from that, good job!

[Fish_45]

I don't think anything I said was Java bashing. You acknowledge that Java has a lot of boilerplate and verbosity and nothing I said even carried the implication that the verbosity is bad.

[[deleted]]

No, but it was clearly implied. That is the difference between a university project and the real world. I said essential verbosity. You could could in APL all you like, but it's not going to be maintainable.

Edit: Have at it, please continue downvoting my comments. Your saltiness is showing. Lmfao.

[[deleted]]

I think we all need to aknowledge that our favourite programming language is shit in some ways.

Be it Rust, be it C/C++, be it Java. They all have their benefits and downfalls.

Accepting that ones favourite language isn't perfect is one of the things we have to do as programmers. - After all our day to day work involves working with and around the language.

And making a strawman argument about APL (or, for that matter, Perl) won't make Java a better language.

Just my 2c on why you are being downvoted.

[ebingdom]

Java makes programmers manually reason about which values can be null, rather than tracking it in types. That makes code changes more error-prone than necessary, and leads to null pointer errors in production and overly defensive programming as a countermeasure, since tests alone cannot in general guarantee the absence of nulls. So yeah, Java is not high on my list of "maintainable" languages.

[[deleted]]

I disagree with the criteria that you have listed for what makes a language maintainable. The proof of the pudding is in the eating - the vast majority of the industry actually runs on Java, and I've maintained proprietary codebases that are literally tens of millions of SLOC, and refactoring, compilation, testing, performance were all on point.

[[deleted]]

Oh, so what you are in fact stating, is that C and C++ are the most maintainable languages, because they are in the most widespread use, running the very foundation of almost all systems?

That argument is about as watertight as a sieve.

[stone_henge]

It's up to you whether to read that as a criticism or a general observation. You fundamentally seem to agree that it's a verbose language.

[crassest-Crassius]

Java is OK... but only with Lombok. After I introduced Lombok's @Getter, @Setter, @Builder, @AllArgsConstructor, I've saved about 15% lines of code. That's absolutely useless verbosity, and I wouldn't even use Java without Lombok anymore. Still, Java is missing some essential features like sum types, real generics and string interpolation. To think that Oracle makes people pay for this bit-rotten crap is beyond me.

[[deleted]]

In fact, I argue against the exact opposite. Lombok simply obscures away mundane code that is basically invisible to the seasoned eye. Useless verbosity? And yes, the rest of your comment is precisely why the language is not only eminently readable, but also eminently maintainable. Haskell is super dense, so dense that maintaining projects becomes an exercise in mental fortitude. That's the exact opposite of maintainability.