On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 3:56 PM, F i L <[email protected]> wrote: > Paulo Pinto wrote: >> The main benefit dynamic languages bring to the table is not requiring to >> write types everywhere, duck typing, and the flexibility metaprogramming >> has. >> > > I'll give you the metaprogramming bit, but duck-typing is rarely a benefit > over languages, like D and C#, which support "auto"/"var" keywords. I'd > actually argue that getting early compile-time error when I accidentally > change variable type (except in areas I explicitly want it) is actually a > time saver of statically typed languages. Granted casting types is a bit > lower-level concept and can be a pain to type. > > > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> Relevant insight: http://existentialtype.**wordpress.com/2011/03/19/** >> dynamic-languages-are-static-**languages/<http://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/dynamic-languages-are-static-languages/> >> > > Thanks for the link. I understand all code eventually becomes binary, of > course, and I have a pretty good understanding of how V8 JS functions > internally. I just can't see why someone would want to use an "expressively > straightjacketed" (as the article puts it) language when they have the > option not to. > > > Adam D. Ruppe wrote: >> import std.variant; >> struct Extendable { >> Variant[string] properties; >> Variant opDispatch(string name)() { >> return properties[name]; >> } >> Variant opDispatch(string name, T)(T t) { >> properties[name] = t; >> return properties[name]; >> } >> } >> >> void main() { >> auto a = Extendable(); >> a.sweet = 10; >> a.cool = { a.sweet = a.sweet + 1; } >> a.cool(); >> } >> > > Awesome! I knew it was possible, just didn't think it'd be that easy! You > know, it might be nice to an std.dynamic or extend variant to include a > general purpose Dynamic type. Just a thought. > > > > so Wrote: >> I'd love to use D but it is not an option is it? At least for the >> things i am after, say game scripting. >> > > I think D's a great option. A D compiler would only have to be distributed > with the tool-chain/editor, and scripts could be statically compiled with > the rest of engine. Safe-D is safe, and comparably easy to understand as > other common scripting languages (Unity's uses C# for example) and advanced > scripters would have the options of getting real low-level with their logic > blocks. Plus, if the rest of the game engine was written in D, integrating > the scripts would be completely seamless. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > On a completely irrelevant, but slightly related note: I have just > released my first Unity 3D game for Android/iPhone, Space Pizza Delivery! ( > https://play.google.com/**store/apps/details?id=com.**ReignStudios.** > SpacePizzaDelivery<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ReignStudios.SpacePizzaDelivery> > ) > > Woohoo! It's simple, but fun, and we have a much more ambitious project in > the works. Hopefully the start of my game-maker career! :-D (and yes, I am > shamelessly advertising ;p) >
Got a score of 292 while spending most of the time with just a sliver of life. Those sneaky health powerups kept getting knocked off the screen before they'd reach me. Fun though. Regards, Brad Anderson
