www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - D, Parasail, Pascal, and Rust vs The Steelman

reply Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD language 
requirements [0].

http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements
Mar 21 2018
next sibling parent bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


It seems very biased with the "partial?"
Mar 21 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Martin Tschierschke <mt smartdolphin.de> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


Interesting!

Do you understand this:


7H. Formal Array Parameters. The number of dimensions for formal 
array parameters must be specified in programs and shall be 
determinable during translation. Determination of the  subscript 
range for formal array parameters may be delayed until 
invocation and may vary from  call to call. Subscript ranges 
shall be accessible within function and procedure bodies without 
being passed as explicit parameters.



Subscript ranges are not accessible in D or Rust.


I do not understand the meaning of "subscript ranges"? Isn't this 
slicing?
Mar 21 2018
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 04:08:07PM +0000, Martin Tschierschke via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:


[...]

 [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


 
 Interesting!
 
 Do you understand this:
 

 7H. Formal Array Parameters. The number of dimensions for formal
 array parameters must be specified in programs and shall be
 determinable during translation. Determination of the  subscript
 range for formal array parameters may be delayed until invocation
 and may vary from  call to call. Subscript ranges shall be
 accessible within function and procedure bodies without being passed
 as explicit parameters.


 

 Subscript ranges are not accessible in D or Rust.


 
 I do not understand the meaning of "subscript ranges"? Isn't this
 slicing?


AFAICT, "subscript" in the spec just means the range of valid array
indices (it's old terminology from the 70's / 80's).

In which case, it is not true that subscript ranges are not accessible
in D (I don't know about Rust); all D arrays have indices from 0 to
.length-1, so the callee can always access the range of allowed indices,
and the caller never has to pass .length explicitly.


T

-- 
It only takes one twig to burn down a forest.
Mar 21 2018
parent Martin Tschierschke <mt smartdolphin.de> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 16:19:35 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]

 I do not understand the meaning of "subscript ranges"? Isn't 
 this slicing?


 AFAICT, "subscript" in the spec just means the range of valid 
 array indices (it's old terminology from the 70's / 80's).

 In which case, it is not true that subscript ranges are not 
 accessible in D (I don't know about Rust); all D arrays have 
 indices from 0 to .length-1, so the callee can always access 
 the range of allowed indices, and the caller never has to pass 
 .length explicitly.


 T


With this D fulfills, 95% of the "Steelman requirement" partially 
or better :-)
Mar 21 2018
prev sibling parent Jim Balter <Jim Balter.name> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 16:08:07 UTC, Martin Tschierschke 
wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


 Interesting!

 Do you understand this:


7H. Formal Array Parameters. The number of dimensions for 
formal array parameters must be specified in programs and shall 
be determinable during translation. Determination of the  
subscript range for formal array parameters may be delayed 
until invocation and may vary from  call to call. Subscript 
ranges shall be accessible within function and procedure bodies 
without being passed as explicit parameters.



Subscript ranges are not accessible in D or Rust.


 I do not understand the meaning of "subscript ranges"? Isn't 
 this slicing?


I believe this means the range of the underlying array. For 
arrays on the heap, the D runtime could actually figure this out 
(using the same mechanism as for calculating .capacity), but of 
course it can't be done generally.
Aug 21 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

1D. Efficiency.


Judging by parasail example in wikipedia it looks allocation 
heavy. Things like
Println("About to insert " | Key | " => " | Val);
Presumably because it doesn't have variadic arguments?
Mar 22 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Meta <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


"The central failure of the language is the myopic focus on the 
affine typing solution to heap allocation and thread safety. The 
creators do not seem to realise that other solutions already 
exist, and that dynamic memory allocation is not the only safety 
issue a programmer has to cope with."

Interesting that the author's criticism of Rust lines up very 
closely with Andrei's.
Mar 22 2018
parent reply Shachar Shemesh <shachar weka.io> writes:
On 22/03/18 12:28, Meta wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD language 
 requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


 
 "The central failure of the language is the myopic focus on the affine 
 typing solution to heap allocation and thread safety. The creators do 
 not seem to realise that other solutions already exist, and that dynamic 
 memory allocation is not the only safety issue a programmer has to cope 
 with."
 
 Interesting that the author's criticism of Rust lines up very closely 
 with Andrei's.


Spoken on the forum for a language that has still not managed to make 
sure that a destructor actually gets called every time an object is 
destroyed.....

Shachar
Mar 22 2018
next sibling parent reply Radu <void null.pt> writes:
On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 11:58:02 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:

 On 22/03/18 12:28, Meta wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 [...]


 
 "The central failure of the language is the myopic focus on 
 the affine typing solution to heap allocation and thread 
 safety. The creators do not seem to realise that other 
 solutions already exist, and that dynamic memory allocation is 
 not the only safety issue a programmer has to cope with."
 
 Interesting that the author's criticism of Rust lines up very 
 closely with Andrei's.


 Spoken on the forum for a language that has still not managed 
 to make sure that a destructor actually gets called every time 
 an object is destroyed.....

 Shachar


Shaming this one? 
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14246#c6

Indeed, that sucks big time!
Mar 22 2018
parent Shachar Shemesh <shachar weka.io> writes:
On 22/03/18 16:45, Radu wrote:

 On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 11:58:02 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:

 On 22/03/18 12:28, Meta wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 [...]


 "The central failure of the language is the myopic focus on the 
 affine typing solution to heap allocation and thread safety. The 
 creators do not seem to realise that other solutions already exist, 
 and that dynamic memory allocation is not the only safety issue a 
 programmer has to cope with."

 Interesting that the author's criticism of Rust lines up very closely 
 with Andrei's.


 Spoken on the forum for a language that has still not managed to make 
 sure that a destructor actually gets called every time an object is 
 destroyed.....

 Shachar


 
 Shaming this one? https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14246#c6
 
 Indeed, that sucks big time!


There is hope.

We finally merged a PR that removes the changelog that erroneously 
claimed this issue was resolved.
https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/commit/45ca5e35d3de824e104c3049083eb23fa03775c5

Progress!!

Shachar
Aug 21 2018
prev sibling parent Meta <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 11:58:02 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:

 Interesting that the author's criticism of Rust lines up very 
 closely with Andrei's.


 Spoken on the forum for a language that has still not managed 
 to make sure that a destructor actually gets called every time 
 an object is destroyed.....

 Shachar


Just an observation. I wasn't criticizing Rust.
Mar 22 2018
prev sibling parent reply Atila Neves <atila.neves gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements



 Rust has by far the most support for the functional programming 
 paradigm.


I wonder how they concluded that.

Atila
Mar 22 2018
next sibling parent reply Ali <fakeemail example.com> writes:
On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 11:16:37 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements



 Rust has by far the most support for the functional 
 programming paradigm.


 I wonder how they concluded that.

 Atila


While I dont know Rust, it didnt come to me to question this 
claim knowing that Rust is generally advertised as being 
influenced by OCaml, and knowing that there is a long history 
between Rust and OCaml
Mar 22 2018
parent bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 14:49:17 UTC, Ali wrote:

 On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 11:16:37 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD 
 language requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - 
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements



 Rust has by far the most support for the functional 
 programming paradigm.


 I wonder how they concluded that.

 Atila


 While I dont know Rust, it didnt come to me to question this 
 claim knowing that Rust is generally advertised as being 
 influenced by OCaml, and knowing that there is a long history 
 between Rust and OCaml


The first Rust compiler was in fact written in OCaml if I 
remember correct. You can even find it in the history of the 
github repository.
Mar 22 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Per =?UTF-8?B?Tm9yZGzDtnc=?= <per.nordlow gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 22 March 2018 at 11:16:37 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:

 I wonder how they concluded that.

 Atila


I too.
Mar 22 2018
prev sibling parent Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 22.03.2018 12:16, Atila Neves wrote:

 On Wednesday, 21 March 2018 at 12:52:19 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 An article comparing the above languages as per the DoD language 
 requirements [0].

 http://jedbarber.id.au/steelman.html

 [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steelman_language_requirements


 

 Rust has by far the most support for the functional programming paradigm.


 
 I wonder how they concluded that.
 
 Atila
 


It is expression-based and can pattern-match on built-in tuples and 
algebraic data types, it has traits, variables are immutable by default 
and mutable aliasing is discouraged by the type system. (However, it 
lacks proper tail calls, just like D.)
Mar 22 2018