On Oct 10, 2012, at 10:26 PM, Bennie Kloosteman wrote:
> I think designing for Intellisense and auto completion is  very important 
> these days especially when you have huge number of libs or a large runtime .  
>  This means no short names taking up the namespace etc

I think there is also some sense in which this is an issue of 
momentum/resources - certain languages have lots of it, and as a result, grow 
sophisticated tooling ecosystems. This is often distinct from what the 
semantics of the languages allow. 

For example, in languages with powerful type systems, there is potential for 
pretty amazing tooling. For instance, there is no reason why an editor / IDE 
for rust couldn't be doing type checking / inference while you are writing, and 
could highlight type system (or borrow checking) errors as they occur (this 
alone would be an amazing productivity booster). Similarly, you could write the 
name of a variable, and with some sort of completion, get any functions that 
take its type as the first parameter. Or I could imagine a system where you 
type the arguments to the function and hit a button and get completion of all 
functions that match the correct types (figuring out where the last statement 
ended, and thus the arguments started, is easy). We can also do the more 
familiar completion on trait implementations (i.e., methods). There are 
probably also ways in which the tooling could make use of the other special 
features that rust has (beyond just having a nice type system), but I 
 haven't thought of them yet :)
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev

Reply via email to