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

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?"

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?

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.

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 :-)

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?

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.

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

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

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!