Declaring Functions AS TYPEs
#13
As long as we're wishing...

@SMcNeill @a740g @offbyone I asked this in private already, but would like to share this here.

Are there plans to evolve the language further with things like...

  1. Native BOOL  _TRUE and _FALSE (maybe using '$:BOOL to make it optional)
  2. Optional parameters for SUBs and FUNCTIONs
  3. EVAL("QB CODE")
  4. Returning arrays from SUBs and FUNCTIONs
  5. Arrays inside UDTs
  6. Arrays of UDTs inside UDTs
  7. Passing FUNCTIONs and SUBs into other FUNCTIONs and SUBs
  8. '$INCLUDE_ONCE:
  9. Native JSON ('$JSON)
  10. Native DICTIONARY ('$DICTIONARY)
  11. FUNCTIONs and SUBs inside other FUNCTIONs and SUBs

These things are so nice in other languages, I'm finding I'm really missing them.
The issue isn't that QB64PE isn't like every other language - it can be it's own thing, the issue is I'm building bad habits.

GOSUB and GOTO lol - Nothing wrong with them they work fine, but the reason I used those recently is because it's so cumbersome to pass variables around elegantly. The language isn't DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) at all.

So instead of shimming everything into funcs and subs where i am now using gosub and goto, i just move on with life. 
Meanwhile my cognitive load is higher than it should be in QB64 vs. other languages.

Anyway

Just some thoughts

There are work-arounds for 1, 4, 8, 9, and 10, I know, but having to work-around shouldn't be required, IMO. 

QB64PE has taken the approach of evolution, making things better, etc. 

These few things wouldn't really be drastically changing anything unless someone wanted to use them (read: users of newer languages contemporary in the modern work force)

I don't know the way it's written underneath the hood, but do you guys have a roadmap or a vision?

If not, why not? what are the goals of QB64PE project?

Thanks for reading ?
grymmjack (gj!)
GitHubYouTube | Soundcloud | 16colo.rs
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by TerryRitchie - 08-16-2023, 02:26 AM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by dbox - 08-16-2023, 02:56 AM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by mnrvovrfc - 08-16-2023, 03:08 AM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by OldMoses - 08-16-2023, 11:53 AM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by mnrvovrfc - 08-16-2023, 12:33 PM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by a740g - 08-16-2023, 12:38 PM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by bplus - 08-16-2023, 02:38 PM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by Kernelpanic - 08-16-2023, 04:14 PM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by grymmjack - 08-16-2023, 09:50 PM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by mnrvovrfc - 08-16-2023, 11:25 PM
RE: Declaring Functions AS TYPEs - by bplus - 08-17-2023, 12:41 AM



Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)