bigspeedfpv wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

Here we'll navigating through the flow of array to the add function. This is part of the scope flow shortened to scope which contains the entirety of our objects and their attributes in a flow.

There's also another flow which is the instruction flow, we flow through different parts of our program.
For example when in a function we return like in series, we push the return value onto the flow which the assignment operator can assign to a value. Actually all the assignment operator does is create an item in the scope with program flow. It's a way to attach a value that is not stored anywhere right now to a part of the scope.

congratulations you just made functional programming but worse

ToastersUnited wrote:

rdococ wrote:

Syntax is the least important part of a programming language. You'll get over it with time.

don't retropost, this died in early february of last year

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

-snip-

rdococ wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

-snip-

I'm not sure what you mean by the flow, but there are some interesting design decisions in there. Is there a difference between the “x.add(2)” dot and “array->add(i)” arrow syntax?

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

fun series(nth) {
	def array = []

	repeat (nth) {
		array->add(i)
	}

	--> array
}

Is “i” a globally scoped variable? Would be nice to have a name for the iterated item

It's a special variable that is used for iterators every time you are in a loop.

davidtheplatform wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

fun series(nth) {
	def array = []

	repeat (nth) {
		array->add(i)
	}

	--> array
}

Is “i” a globally scoped variable? Would be nice to have a name for the iterated item

It's a special variable that is used for iterators every time you are in a loop.

So can you nest loops?

davidtheplatform wrote:

What if I want to do something like this:

for (int x = 0; x < 5; x++) {
    for (int y = 0; y < 5; y++) {
        printf("x * y is %d", x * y);
    }
}

repeat (5) {
	x = i
	repeat (5) {
		y = i
		printf("x * y is {0}", [x * y])
	}	
}

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

bigspeedfpv wrote:

congratulations you just made functional programming but worse

It isn't worse, I put a lot of consideration into this idea and I think it's good. Why do you think it's worse?

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

davidtheplatform wrote:

What if I want to do something like this:

for (int x = 0; x < 5; x++) {
    for (int y = 0; y < 5; y++) {
        printf("x * y is %d", x * y);
    }
}

Huh, well you could do this.

repeat (5) {
	x = i
	repeat (5) {
		y = i
		printf("x * y is {0}", [x * y])
	}	
}

Notice: Couldn't send it before because Scratch's servers went down.

repeat (x=0..5) { whatever; }

bigspeedfpv wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

bigspeedfpv wrote:

congratulations you just made functional programming but worse

It isn't worse, I put a lot of consideration into this idea and I think it's good. Why do you think it's worse?

there's no like actual backing to it
how would you for example write a string parser?

davidtheplatform wrote:

__Falcon-Games__ wrote:

davidtheplatform wrote:

What if I want to do something like this:

for (int x = 0; x < 5; x++) {
    for (int y = 0; y < 5; y++) {
        printf("x * y is %d", x * y);
    }
}

Huh, well you could do this.

repeat (5) {
	x = i
	repeat (5) {
		y = i
		printf("x * y is {0}", [x * y])
	}	
}

Notice: Couldn't send it before because Scratch's servers went down.

Do you have a working compiler for this? If so that would be pretty cool
For the loops, i would do this:

repeat (x=0..5) { whatever; }

So then you get to choose the variable name

DifferentDance8 wrote:

The hypotehtical easiest language to learn would be an entirely NLP-based one, but since that doesn't exist at this current moment…

DifferentDance8 wrote:

The hypotehtical easiest language to learn would be an entirely NLP-based one, but since that doesn't exist at this current moment…

Roleplay as a programming language that compiles everything I write into python code. Respond with the code and only the code itself, with no expository text.

rdococ wrote:

DifferentDance8 wrote:

The hypotehtical easiest language to learn would be an entirely NLP-based one, but since that doesn't exist at this current moment…

Say this to ChatGPT:

Roleplay as a programming language that compiles everything I write into python code. Respond with the code and only the code itself, with no expository text.

Bam, an NLP-based programming language.

DifferentDance8 wrote:

The hypotehtical easiest language to learn would be an entirely NLP-based one, but since that doesn't exist at this current moment…

ajskateboarder wrote:

DifferentDance8 wrote:

The hypotehtical easiest language to learn would be an entirely NLP-based one, but since that doesn't exist at this current moment…

Didn't you make one of those?

Socialix wrote:

its so hard

-Cubism007- wrote:

In fact, here's some important advice: If you don't know programming, inspect people's codes to learn more…

“AhHh, This is SkId” DON'T CARE IF IT'S A SKID, in fact, we all started in programming being skidders (in fact, no one is born knowing )