Permalink
Commits on Dec 17, 2010
  1. Removed obsolete comments.

    committed Dec 17, 2010
  2. Fixed indentation

    committed Dec 17, 2010
  3. Fixed some specs description.

    committed Dec 17, 2010
  4. Don't use 'should' in specs.

    brixen committed Dec 17, 2010
Commits on Dec 15, 2010
  1. Removed un-used methods from Table

    committed Dec 15, 2010
  2. First Table implementation.

    committed Dec 15, 2010
  3. Remove rbc files on clean task

    committed Dec 15, 2010
  4. Removed machodis.pl inherited from _why's potion. We dont need machin…

    …e assembly for poison.
    committed Dec 15, 2010
Commits on Nov 20, 2010
  1. More closure specs.

    brixen committed Nov 20, 2010
  2. Begin parsing closures.

    We are changing from _why's syntax for closures here. He had
    
      (a, b, ...) : statements.
    
    where the (a, b, ...) table was optional. We have
    
      : (a, b, ...) statements.
    
    where, again, the (a, b, ...) table is optional. In this new
    form, it is easy to communicate that:
    
      "A closure starts with ':' and ends with '.' and has an optional
      table of arguments as the first element after the ':'"
    
    However, this does lead to one potential ambiguity (for the user,
    not the parser). The following has an empty body, rather than a single
    statement comprised of a table:
    
      : (a, b) .
    
    To create a closure that is a single table as the first item, the
    optional table of arguments must be specified:
    
      : () (a, b) .
    
    While it would be nice to avoid this sort of case completely, it
    should be fairly rare. The tradeoff is made in the favor of the simplicity
    of describing (and identifying when reading code) what a closure is.
    
    A second reason for this syntax is that attaching a block to a message
    is much nicer. The syntax _why used could not handle the following elegantly:
    
      5 to 10 : (x) x string print.
      5 to (10, 2) : (x) x string print.
    
    because there is nothing separating the argument to #to (eg 10 or (10, 2) )
    from the argument table for the closure. Using this alternative syntax, the
    closure start token ':' nicely separates the table of arguments as part of a
    message and the table of arguments for the closure.
    brixen committed Nov 20, 2010
Commits on Nov 19, 2010
Commits on Nov 17, 2010
  1. Add #string to String.

    brixen committed Nov 17, 2010
  2. More operator parsing.

    brixen committed Nov 17, 2010
Commits on Nov 16, 2010
  1. Parse arithmetic expressions.

    brixen committed Nov 15, 2010
Commits on Nov 14, 2010
  1. Rework nil, true, false.

    brixen committed Nov 14, 2010
Commits on Nov 13, 2010
  1. Add mspec as a dependency.

    brixen committed Nov 13, 2010
Commits on Nov 12, 2010
  1. Basic compilation infrastructure.

    brixen committed Nov 12, 2010
  2. Added node visit methods.

    brixen committed Nov 12, 2010
  3. Very basic syntax errors.

    brixen committed Nov 12, 2010
  4. Parse tables.

    brixen committed Nov 12, 2010
Commits on Nov 11, 2010
  1. Parse basic strings.

    brixen committed Nov 11, 2010
  2. Parsing assignment better.

    brixen committed Nov 11, 2010
  3. More parsing.

    brixen committed Nov 11, 2010
  4. More parsing.

    brixen committed Nov 11, 2010
Commits on Nov 10, 2010