Re: [Felix-language] forever

On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 08:56 +0200, Rhythmic Fistman wrote: > How do I break out of a "forever" block? > I tried "break" but that didn't work. Forever is a higher order library function isn't it? There are three ways it can stop: 1) goto out of it 2) program error (C++ exception) 3) suicide by d

Re: [Felix-language] C syntax

On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 10:08 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Maybe you can try to delete the rules of Felix that are causing the > ambiguity when csyntax is opened. I'm not sure how to delete a rule. The function to delete rules is more or less useless, because it requires you keep an exact copy

Re: [Felix-language] C syntax

Quoting skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 10:08 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Maybe you can try to delete the rules of Felix that are causing the >> ambiguity when csyntax is opened. > > I'm not sure how to delete a rule. The function to delete You just have to use dyp

Re: [Felix-language] C syntax

On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:48 +0200, Emmanuel Onzon wrote: > Quoting skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > rules is more or less useless, because it requires you > > keep an exact copy of the rule. > > Why ? how else can it recognize the rule? -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.s

Re: [Felix-language] C syntax

On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:48 +0200, Emmanuel Onzon wrote: > Quoting skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > The point is you can't delete the translated rule because > > it is physically a different Ocaml term. > > It should only need to be structurally equal to the existing > rule you want to delete, no

Re: [Felix-language] C syntax

Quoting skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:48 +0200, Emmanuel Onzon wrote: >> Quoting skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > The point is you can't delete the translated rule because >> > it is physically a different Ocaml term. >> >> It should only need to be structurally equal

Re: [Felix-language] REPL?

On 19 July 2007, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > On 7/17/07, skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The problem is .. Emacs and Gvim can already do this.. >> so why do all that work and have a substandard >> text editor? > > I've used python's all the time, I find it super useful to test out > small things

Re: [Felix-language] REPL?

On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 22:28 -0400, Peter Tanski wrote: > On 19 July 2007, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > There might be a way to do > interpreted code with a hook through CINT Cint.html>. So that could handle code generation and execution; for > parsing the command li

Re: [Felix-language] REPL?

On Jul 19, 2007, at 10:47 PM, skaller wrote: > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 22:28 -0400, Peter Tanski wrote: >> On 19 July 2007, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > >> There might be a way to do >> interpreted code with a hook through CINT > Cint.html>. So that could handle code genera

Re: [Felix-language] REPL?

On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 23:21 -0400, Peter Tanski wrote: > and recompile and relink the whole object again. Personally, I don't > think it is worth it: given more time I would rather master felix. > You know, until a few emails ago I did not know the 'static' option > existed, which is what

[Felix-language] C syntax

C syntax with a 'hack' and a caveat should now work in Felix. The syntax is not full C, but these should work: function definitions variables and parameters like 'int x' typedefs struct union which I think is all of C... :) [Felix enum is already the same

Re: [Felix-language] REPL?

On Jul 19, 2007, at 11:38 PM, skaller wrote: > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 23:21 -0400, Peter Tanski wrote: >> and recompile and relink the whole object again. Personally, I don't >> think it is worth it: given more time I would rather master felix. >> You know, until a few emails ago I did not know th