schala/TODO.md

179 lines
5.4 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

2019-11-08 18:56:15 -08:00
# Plan of attack
1. modify visitor so it can handle scopes
-this is needed both to handle import scope correctly
-and also to support making FQSNs aware of function parameters
2. Once FQSNs are aware of function parameters, most of the Rc<String> things in eval.rs can go away
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
# TODO items
2019-01-27 22:38:20 -08:00
2019-10-24 03:09:17 -07:00
-use 'let' sigil in patterns for variables :
```
q is MyStruct(let a, Chrono::Trigga) then {
}
```
2019-11-18 03:11:00 -08:00
-idea: what if there was something like React jsx syntas built in? i.e. a way to automatically transform some kind of markup
into a function call, cf. `<h1 prop="arg">` -> h1(prop=arg)
2019-09-03 02:19:37 -07:00
## General code cleanup
- I think I can restructure the parser to get rid of most instances of expect!, at least at the beginning of a rule
2019-10-09 02:32:41 -07:00
DONE -experiment with storing metadata via ItemIds on AST nodes (cf. https://rust-lang.github.io/rustc-guide/hir.html, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/librustc/hir/mod.rs )
2019-09-10 03:33:28 -07:00
-implement and test open/use statements
2019-09-10 03:40:41 -07:00
-implement field access
2019-09-10 03:33:28 -07:00
- standardize on an error type that isn't String
-implement a visitor pattern for the use of scope_resolver
2019-09-26 01:32:33 -07:00
- maybe implement this twice: 1) the value-returning, no-default one in the haoyi blogpost,
2019-10-13 16:50:54 -07:00
-look at https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/wikis/pattern-synonyms
2019-09-26 03:26:14 -07:00
2) the non-value-returning, default one like in rustc (cf. https://github.com/rust-unofficial/patterns/blob/master/patterns/visitor.md)
2019-09-03 02:19:37 -07:00
2019-11-08 18:53:38 -08:00
-parser error - should report subset of AST parsed *so far*
- what if you used python 'def' syntax to define a function? what error message makes sense here?
2019-08-12 11:40:31 -07:00
## Reduction
- make a good type for actual language builtins to avoid string comparisons
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
## Typechecking
2019-08-12 11:40:31 -07:00
- make a type to represent types rather than relying on string comparisons
2019-04-29 23:57:59 -07:00
- look at https://rickyhan.com/jekyll/update/2018/05/26/hindley-milner-tutorial-rust.html
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- cf. the notation mentioned in the cardelli paper, the debug information for the `typechecking` pass should
print the generated type variable for every subexpression in an expression
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- think about idris-related ideas of multiple implementations of a type for an interface (+ vs * impl for monoids, for preorder/inorder/postorder for Foldable)
2019-01-27 22:38:20 -08:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
-should have an Idris-like `cast To From` function
2019-01-27 22:38:20 -08:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
## Schala-lang syntax
2019-01-27 22:38:20 -08:00
2019-05-26 00:23:54 -07:00
-idea: the `type` declaration should have some kind of GADT-like syntax
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- Idea: if you have a pattern-match where one variant has a variable and the other lacks it
instead of treating this as a type error, promote the bound variable to an option type
2017-12-13 00:52:54 -08:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- Include extensible scala-style html"string ${var}" string interpolations
2017-12-13 00:52:54 -08:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- A neat idea for pattern matching optimization would be if you could match on one of several things in a list
ex:
```if x {
is (comp, LHSPat, RHSPat) if comp in ["==, "<"] -> ...
}```
- Schala should have both currying *and* default arguments!
```fn a(b: Int, c:Int, d:Int = 1) -> Int
a(1,2) : Int
a(1,2,d=2): Int
a(_,1,3) : Int -> Int
a(1,2, c=_): Int -> Int
a(_,_,_) : Int -> Int -> Int -> Int
```
- scoped types - be able to define a quick enum type scoped to a function or other type for
something, that only is meant to be used as a quick bespoke interface between
two other things
ex.
```type enum {
type enum MySubVariant {
SubVariant1, SubVariant2, etc.
}
Variant1(MySubVariant),
Variant2(...),
}```
2019-01-27 22:38:20 -08:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- inclusive/exclusive range syntax like .. vs ..=
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
## Compilation
-look into Inkwell for rust LLVM bindings
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
-https://cranelift.readthedocs.io/en/latest/?badge=latest<Paste>
2018-07-18 23:00:11 -07:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
## Other links of note
2019-01-07 01:59:12 -08:00
2019-03-20 01:15:35 -07:00
- https://nshipster.com/never/
-consult http://gluon-lang.org/book/embedding-api.html
2019-10-09 02:32:41 -07:00
## Trying if-syntax again
2019-10-09 02:32:41 -07:00
//simple if expr
if x == 10 then "a" else "z"
//complex if expr
if x == 10 then {
let a = 1
let b = 2
a + b
} else {
55
}
// different comparison ops
if x {
== 1 then "a"
.isPrime() then "b"
else "c"
}
/* for now disallow `if x == { 1 then ... }`, b/c hard to parse
//simple pattern-matching
if x is Person("Ivan", age) then age else 0
//match-block equivalent
if x {
is Person("Ivan", _) then "Ivan"
is Person(_, age) if age > 13 then "barmitzvah'd"
else "foo"
}
## (OLD) Playing around with conditional syntax ideas
2018-07-01 00:42:50 -07:00
2019-06-16 16:07:27 -07:00
2018-06-14 00:49:11 -07:00
- if/match playground
simple if
`if x == 1.0 { "a" } else { "b" }`
one comparison multiple targets:
`if x == { 1.0 -> "a", 2.0 -> "b", else -> "c" }`
different comparison operators/ method calls:
`if x { == 1.0 -> "a", eq NaN -> "n", .hella() -> "h", else -> "z" }`
pattern matching/introducing bindings:
`if alice { .age < 18 -> "18", is Person("Alice", age) -> "${age}", else -> "none" }`
pattern matching w/ if-let:
`if person is Person("Alice", age) { "${age}" } else { "nope" }`
2018-06-14 05:42:12 -07:00
-https://soc.github.io/languages/unified-condition-syntax syntax:
`if <cond-expr>" then <then-expr> else <else-expr>`
`if <half-expr> \n <rest-expr1> then <result1-expr> \n <rest-expr2> then <result-expr2> else <result3-expr>`
-and rest-exprs (or "targets") can have 'is' for pattern-matching, actually so can a full cond-expr
UNIFIED IF EXPRESSIONS FINAL WORK:
basic syntax:
`if_expr := if discriminator '{' (guard_expr)* '}'`
`guard_expr := pattern 'then' block_or_expr'`
`pattern := rhs | is_pattern`
`is_pattern := 'is' ???`
`rhs := expression | ???`
if the only two guard patterns are true and false, then the abbreviated syntax:
`'if' discriminator 'then' block_or_expr 'else' block_or_expr`
can replace `'if' discriminator '{' 'true' 'then' block_or_expr; 'false' 'then' block_or_expr '}'`