Re: [sc-dev] ideas from ruby and clean

[James McCartney <asynth@xxxxxx>]

On Dec 9, 2004, at 8:17 PM, ccos wrote:

> in ruby (1..4) gives a range much like sc's current array notation but 
> you can also go
>
> (1...4) giving [1,2,3]

my inclination is to say just put a -1 there. this would create several 
methods and about 15 new cases in the compiler.
for consistency you'd have to support
x[1...4]
x[1...4] = z
etc.

> unrelated, but more interesting, in clean language you can write [n..]:
>
> which in sc could be written (n..) returning

I think it would be confusing to have (0..4) return an array but (0..) 
return a stream. and what if you wanted a stream from 0 to 4 ?
better to have distinct syntaxes for each.
[n..] has parsing conflicts. {n..} doesn't work either. you'd have to 
do something like (.n..) or (*n..)
SC is more oriented around patterns than streams. Perhaps a syntax for 
patterns would be more useful.

> 	r {
> 		loop {
> 			yield(n);
> 			n = n + 1;
> 		}
> 	}
>
> http://www.cs.ru.nl/~clean/About_Clean/tutorial/tutorial.html
>
> kind of cool,
> _c
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc-dev mailing list
> sc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-dev