This list was extracted from currently-approved proposals and
corresponding design documents. This is intended to be a summary of the
status quo, not a change.
Proposal to support a limited set of implicit conversions.
This would generally permit only implicit conversions that are lossless and semantics-preserving. In particular, this proposal allows:
- Conversion from an integer type to a wider integer type of the same signedness, and from an unsigned integer type to a wider signed integer type.
- Conversion from an integer type to a floating-point type that has enough mantissa bits to exactly represent all integers in the source type.
- Conversion from integer literals to integer and floating-point types that can represent them.
- Conversion from floating-point literals to floating-point types that can represent them.
- Conversions required for generics: conversions of values between facet types, and conversions of types between type-of-types, as described in the generics proposals.
- Conversions required for inheritance: derived-to-base conversions for class pointers and class values.
Other conversions, such as lossy conversions between arithmetic types and conversions between bool and other types are not supported.
Co-authored-by: josh11b <josh11b@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Geoff Romer <gromer@google.com>
These aren't really statements (because they're not executed at run time), and it's debatable whether they're declarations, since their primary purpose isn't to introduce a name. On Discord, "directive" seemed to be the consensus choice for an alternate term.
This is based on discussion on #732: that we should probably parse the invalid whitespace, then reject it as part of string validation, rather than having different parses. I worry the question of "how is this parsed" may lead to subtly unexpected results if we aren't consistent, so I'm switching the logic from the lexer to the unescape library (and also adjusting the list of rejected whitespace).
I've modified the text from the proposal slightly, focusing the overview more on a design setup, but mostly kept the details. One important thing here is I noticed that raw tab characters are disallowed -- this was a little buried before, and I've now updated the list of characters allowed in a string to exclude tabs. Additionally, I've noted `\0D` in the list of escapes as explicitly invalid.
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Add support for nominal (or "named") classes with encapsulation. Inheritance will be in a later proposal. Here is an example of the proposed syntax:
```
class Circle {
fn Create(c: Point, r: f32) -> Self {
return {.center = c, .radius = r};
}
fn Diameter[me: Self]() -> f32 {
return me.radius * 2;
}
fn Expand[addr me: Self*](distance: f32);
private var center: Point;
private var radius: f32;
}
fn Circle.Expand[addr me: Self*](distance: f32) {
me->radius += distance;
}
```
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
Moving "Global variables" out of "Alternatives"; I don't think it's really been considered in the same way that others have, so there's no reference to provide.
This proposal defines the very basics of `class` types, primarily focused on:
- use cases including: data classes, encapsulated types, inheritance with and without `virtual`, interfaces as base classes, and mixins for code reuse;
- anonymous data types for called _structural data classes_ or _struct types_. Struct literals are used to initialize class values and ad-hoc parameter and return types with named components; and
- future work, including the provisional syntax already in use for features that have not been decided.
The intent is to both make some small incremental progress and get agreement on direction. As such it doesn't include things like nominal types, methods, access control, inheritance, etc.
It proposes this struct type and literal syntax:
```
var p: {.x: Int, .y: Int} = {.x = 0, .y = 1};
```
Note that it uses commas (`,`) between fields instead of semicolons (`;`), and no introducer for types or literal values.
Incorporates decisions from #665 , #653 , #651
Co-authored-by: Geoff Romer <gromer@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
This implements decision #565 to use `T:! Type` to declare generic parameters, and `template T:! Type` for template parameters.
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Expand the description of the structure of a proposal PR. Clarify that
the full PR is the proposal, not only the P-numbered document. Start a
design style guide and use it to describe which parts of a proposal
should not end up in the design.
Co-authored-by: Jon Meow <46229924+jonmeow@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
Propose the decision from #542, noting implementation from #563
Also integrates some of #339 into `variables.md` because that's actually how this started, looking for a proposal reference for #542
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
Co-authored-by: josh11b <josh11b@users.noreply.github.com>
To talk about generics as a programming language feature, you need a lot of
specialized terminology. We need to agree on the words we are using and their
meaning before we can meaningfully talk about the design of the feature itself.
There a number of problems a glossary solves:
Not everyone knows every term, so having a single place to look them up will
improve the ease of understanding, ease of contributing, and accessibility
of the project.
There may not be widespread agreement on the meaning of some terms. In
particular, individual programming languages tend to assign very specific
meanings to terms used within their ecosystem.
Some terms may be used in multiple ways, but we only use the term with one
specific meaning.
Some terms are our invention and we need to introduce them.
Co-authored-by: Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk>
The "generics" feature of Carbon is a large design effort that needs to be broken up into manageable steps. The first thing we need is a high-level goals document. The goals here reflect the desirable properties that we have discovered as part of considering several alternative generics designs:
- Use cases:
- Generic programming
- Upgrade path from C++ abstract interfaces
- Dependency injection
- Generics instead of open overloading and ADL
- Performance
- Better compiler experience
- Encapsulation
- Predictability
- Dispatch control
- Upgrade path from templates
- Coherence
- No novel name lookup
- Learn from others
- Interfaces are nominal
- Interop and evolution
- Bridge for C++ customization points
Goals are summarized in [this presentation](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12yGyu5Pvdag7CJp-_yLVkmbhyvuRIilBTNlkO0LKaHo/edit?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-JB9yrUO4-6J8-zzGhnIyNg).
Co-authored-by: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jon Meow <46229924+jonmeow@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Matthew Riley <mdriley@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: austern <austern@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr@gmail.com>
Now that we've centralized on a monorepo, tidy up some lingering
references.
For the `pr_comments.py` script, I've left the flag in place to select
a repository as it seems useful functionality to have available even if
we don't expect to need it in the near term. That said, I can pull it
out if folks prefer.
I haven't updated any of the *proposals* because it seems better to
leave those as-is from when they were written. The references seem
unlikely to be confusing to me. Happy for suggestions if needed there
though.
Co-authored-by: Jon Meow <46229924+jonmeow@users.noreply.github.com>
One implication here is that both proposals/README.md and the website should use basically the same format for their proposal lists. Another subtle change is that the website sidebar was previously sorted by *filename*, and is now sorted by *title*, which seems better because it's something that readers can see.
Enumerating why files change:
- gen_sidebar.py is the centerpiece, with a couple helpful functions for re-use elsewhere
- Delete the old sidebar html includes
- Modify the Makefile to handle gen_sidebar.py reasonably well (let's be honest... I'm not great at Makefiles)
- Move proposal listing out to its own file (proposals.py) for re-use
- Add a few PYTHONPATH things + `__init__.py` files to get modules importing correctly (may be a better way at this, I've hit a wall though).
This takes #175 and publishes it as interop goals. I've made a few small editorial changes, but the main addition is the "Offer equivalent support for languages other than C++" non-goal which I thought may be useful (in particular, it can be used to clarify why this directory is "interoperability" and not "interoperability_cpp").
Adopts new copyright and markdown toc checks.
The new toc check generates the toc header, so that's why all the md files changed (this had felt better to me for the long-term, more auto-generated content)
Richard Smith
Jon MeowandChandler Carruth
Jeremy G. Siek
Matt Godbolt