making good progress on my parser, and now i'm thinking of committing some crimes >:3
that being having both `and` and `&&`, and `or` and `||`, where the latter coerces to bool and the former does not and acts like lua >_>
making good progress on my parser, and now i'm thinking of committing some crimes >:3
that being having both `and` and `&&`, and `or` and `||`, where the latter coerces to bool and the former does not and acts like lua >_>
in less trolling news i'm really liking the way if/while/etc blocks work in this syntax. either you do this
if x { ... }
or you do
if x: print "single line";
so the colon delineates the end of the condition but is optional if you have a {} block instead of a single line. and yes, this is also valid:
if x: { ... }
@eniko yall got lambdas?
```for_each (sequence, ^ (item) {
work (item);
});
for_each_n (sequence, ^ (item, i) {
work (item);
array[i];
});```
etc
then later you could do what Ruby/early Rust did and allow the recursion-operators to curry and implicitly use trailing-call syntax:
for_each (sequence) ^(item) {
work (item);
};
(i am hung up on this :P)
parents, talk to your children about programming languages before it's too late 😂