2009/11/12 Kristján Valur Jónsson <krist...@ccpgames.com>: > Interesting stuff indeed. > I's just a pity they didn't adopt more features from python, instead sticking > with a C-like syntax and somewhat strong typing :)
I don't think they adopted any features from Python. Several of the people involved in this language worked on Limbo I believe. And rather than being a scripting language, it is a compiled language which strong typing probably makes easier. While one of my first thoughts was that any new language should consider an indentation-based syntax, one of the things I miss in Python is the ability to define functions as argument expressions. In Python, you can only do this using lambda, and it is hardly a consistently readable tool let alone very flexible. Seeing this in Go, the C-like syntax has become appealing. They have an nice example where they chain 100000 microthreads each wrapping the same function that increases the value of a passed argument by one, with channels inbetween. Pumping a value through the chain takes 1.5 seconds. I can't imagine that Stackless will be anything close to that, given the difference between scripting and compiled code. However, trying to read the compiler source code is a challenge. Where Stackless' source code is relatively straightforward, Go's is arcane and hard to decipher. With globals having one letter names (g, m) and function names being short and ambiguous. Cheers, Richard. _______________________________________________ Stackless mailing list Stackless@stackless.com http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
