Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
guillaume.baierouge.fr | ||
| | | | |
lambdaland.org
|
|
| | | | | Should a programming language be powerful and let a programmer do a lot, or should it be safe and protect the programmer from bad mistakes? Contrary to what the title insinuates, these are not diametrically opposed attributes. Nevertheless, this is the mindset that underlies notions such as, "macros, manual memory management, etc. are power tools-they're not supposed to be safe." If safety and power are not necessarily opposed, why does this notion persist? | |
| | | | |
www.avanderlee.com
|
|
| | | | | Macros in Swift allow you to extend the compiler with custom build errors and code generation to eliminate extraneous boilerplate code. | |
| | | | |
lambdaland.org
|
|
| | | | | Theres a neat paper Type Systems as Macros by Chang, Knauth, and Greenman [1] that describes how to implement a typed language using an untyped host language and macro expansion. The paper is neat, but I found the code hard to followthe paper uses a compact notation thats convenient for print, but not so much for reproducing on ones own. This post is my attempt to implement and explain in more accessible terms whats presented in the paper. | |
| | | | |
typesanitizer.com
|
|
| | | A discussion of different developer tools which (can) build on top of a compiler, and how those affect compiler design. | ||
