mirror of
https://github.com/kanaka/mal.git
synced 2024-10-27 14:52:16 +03:00
8a19f60386
- Reorder README to have implementation list after "learning tool" bullet. - This also moves tests/ and libs/ into impls. It would be preferrable to have these directories at the top level. However, this causes difficulties with the wasm implementations which need pre-open directories and have trouble with paths starting with "../../". So in lieu of that, symlink those directories to the top-level. - Move the run_argv_test.sh script into the tests directory for general hygiene.
6.9 KiB
6.9 KiB
Step 1
- What if I don't have an OOP language?
- types.qx could be more prominently mentioned...
- A table with all types and suggested object names would be hugely useful
- Same for a list of all errors and their messages
- Mention return types and argument types consistently
- More on int/float and their grammar (int is mentioned implicitly in the ASCII art, nothing on signs or bases or their lack of)
- Note that a string must be parsed for the
print_readably
thing to work and mention how one could do that (like, by using aread
oreval
-like thing or alternatively, chopping off the surrounding quotes and doing the inverse transformation of the printing) - How is an atom printed?
Step 2
- What if my language doesn't support lambdas, let alone passing around named functions? Ideally write something about implementing/using functors/delegates or replacing that namespace with a big switch as with VHDL. Another problem is that if you choose a different solution in step 4, step 2 could end up no longer functional...
- What kind of error (read: what message?) is raised when no value can be looked up for the symbol? Is it arbitrary? Do I need to extend my error handling to allow for format strings?
- It would be worth a mention that you should extend the printer to handle "native" functions (or in oldtimey terms, subrs)
Step 3
- You should modify both eval_ast and EVAL
- Suggest the trick with destructuring the AST into
a0
,a1
, etc. variables for easier access. Perhaps this can be used to clear up the general language used with AST manipulation (like, first parameter and second list element)? - What does def! return? Emacs Lisp for instance returns the symbol whereas the tests suggest the value should be returned instead...
Step 4
- "Implement the strings functions"
- The "no closures" paragraph isn't quite clear. Asides from that, do
native functions don't really need to be wrapped the same way as the
fn*
objects, just introduce another type (like, a Subr and a Func type) and do a check before applying the arguments to it - Why does the guide say that the first argument of
count
can be treated as list, yet there's a test performing(count nil)
and expecting zero as result? - Does it make sense to compare, say, atoms in
=
?
Step 5
- "This is especially important in Lisp languages because they tend to prefer using recursion instead of iteration for control structures." <- I'd argue it's less of a lisp thing (see everything else related to CL) and more a thing functional programming proponents have considered more elegant than introducing iteration constructs (see haskell, ocaml, erlang)
- It's not really clear that the TCO change for
let*
involves the form you'd normally pass toEVAL
to become the newast
. I had to reread this a few more times to understand that the "secondast
" is actually its third argument... - Where did the check for
do
not being broken by TCO go? - What's the deal with the
quux/tests/step5_tco.qx
file?
Step 6
- "The closure calls the your EVAL function […]."
- I still don't have any closures. How the heck do I implement
eval
? What aboutswap!
? - It would be useful to mention that
swap!
sort of requires implementingapply
first...
Step 7
- Why the scare quotes for splicing?
- "Before implementing the quoting forms, you will need to implement some supporting functions in the core namespace:" should be one list item
- "this function takes a list as its second parameter and returns a new list that has the first argument prepended to it." reads backwards
- The quasiquote paragraph is hard to read
- It's rather confusing to refer to the argument of
ast
and to anast
parameter, perhaps name the latter a form? - What could also help would be a visualization of the four
conditionals:
- `42, `()
- `~foo
- `(~@foo) and more
- `(42 ~@foo) and everything else
- Mal/mal is inconsistently capitalized
- "Expand the conditional with reader
read_form
function to add the following four cases" is again weird, better refer to theread_form
function in reader.qx - "concat should support concatenation of lists, vectors, or a mix or both." <- "or a mix or both" is redundant
Step 8
- "In the previous step, quoting enabled some simple manipulation [of] data structures"
- The macroexpand function step refers to call/apply, it's unclear how to proceed if you don't have such a thing
- How should the exception for invalid
nth
access look like? Also, why is it an exception and not an error like with the reader? - How can
first
take a list (or vector), but work onnil
? - The description of
rest
is inconsistent with the tests - "In the main program, use the rep function to define two new control structures macros."
- Why does the definition of
cond
usethrow
although it's only introduced in the next chapter?
Step 9
- It's not really clear that you really just have a
try*
special form, withcatch*
merely existing inside it... - Another thing to clarify is that the exception value is a string
containing the message you'd see (unless you're using
throw
) - Generally, it would be better to explain the general exception handling mechanism (with some examples), then showing how one implements it for both languages with and without exceptions
- Another way than using a global variable is introducing an error
type next to the other MAL types and checking whether something a
function returned is one, although the hint about returning one at
each use of
EVAL
still stands... - Shouldn't either trick be mentioned at the beginning, simply because you'll need it in a language without exceptions to do error handling?
- Why this bizarre treatment for
keyword
? Why is there no test for it? - Is there a test for whether hash maps deduplicate identical keys
when using
hash-map
orassoc
? - What exactly are keys the specification for
dissoc
,get
andcontains?
are speaking of? Can I assume these are either strings or keywords? - Why is it not documented that
get
may takenil
instead of a map? - Perhaps it's worth adding more tests involving symbols to ensure that functions using apply internally don't evaluate their args?
Step A
- "Add meta-data support to mal functions." <- Shouldn't you mention
that this involves implementing
with-meta
andmeta
? - "TODO. Should be separate from the function macro flag." <- Why is this even related?
- It would be worth to mention that
with-meta
shall clone its argument to avoid one of the more sneaky test failure reasons - "The value of this entry should be a mal string containing the name of the current implementation."
- "When the REPL starts up (as opposed to when it is called with a
script and/or arguments), call the rep function with this string to
print a startup header:
"(println (str \"Mal [\" *host-language* \"]\"))".
" <- proof that you better quote these because the asterisks just disappear...