Starlark is the new name for the Skylark configuration language. (The old
name was the code name for a subproject of Bazel and was not suitable for a
project in its own right.)
The Starlark in Go implementation has moved. The code is now hosted at
https://github.com/google/starlark-go
but
looks like Nate has the answer :-) https://github.com/hippogryph/skyhook
On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 10:29:06 PM UTC-5, bsr wrote:
>
> Like Nate mentioned, I too like to try it instead of lua. Is there a good
> example on how to embed skylark to define custom logic. Thanks.
>
> On Monday, Oct
Like Nate mentioned, I too like to try it instead of lua. Is there a good
example on how to embed skylark to define custom logic. Thanks.
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 12:39:43 PM UTC-4, Alan Donovan wrote:
>
> I'm pleased to announce the launch of Skylark in Go: an interpreter for
> Skylark, im
On 7 November 2017 at 15:54, Zellyn Hunter wrote:
> Oh neat. So is it a sort of competitor to jsonnet? I guess jsonnet is
> usually used to generate actual config files, not live-interpret executable
> config.
>
Jsonnet is more of a templating language whereas Skylark is really
arbitrary computa
Oh neat. So is it a sort of competitor to jsonnet? I guess jsonnet is
usually used to generate actual config files, not live-interpret executable
config.
Zellyn
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:46 PM Alan Donovan wrote:
> On 7 November 2017 at 15:36, Zellyn wrote:
>
>> An only-2x-slower than CPython i
On 7 November 2017 at 15:36, Zellyn wrote:
> An only-2x-slower than CPython interpreter is pretty cool. Just very
> curious what y'all are doing with it.
>
Various infrastructure projects (such as Copybara) are using Skylark as a
configuration language since it has proven itself on a large scale
Bump, since y'all seem to be actively posting here :-) An only-2x-slower
than CPython interpreter is pretty cool. Just very curious what y'all are
doing with it.
On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 3:22:44 PM UTC-4, Zellyn wrote:
>
> This looks neat. Are you able to provide more context on what th
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Alan Donovan wrote:
> On 7 November 2017 at 15:06, Ben Hoyt wrote:
>
>>
>> 2x as fast as CPython sounds pretty good to me -- nice!
>>>
> No, CPython is 2x as fast as Skylark in Go. It's implemented in C, so it
> can do things that are sadly impossible in Go,
On 7 November 2017 at 15:06, Ben Hoyt wrote:
>
> 2x as fast as CPython sounds pretty good to me -- nice!
>>>
>>
No, CPython is 2x as fast as Skylark in Go. It's implemented in C, so it
can do things that are sadly impossible in Go, like implement a threaded
bytecode interpreter.
I'm curious wh
> On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 9:42:27 PM UTC-4, Ben Hoyt wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm very curious how the performance of Skylark in Go compares to
>>> Skylark in Java (and CPython 3.6 for that matter) -- any benchmarks on that?
>>>
>>
> I don't have any rigorous comparisons, but my informal testing on
On Saturday, 4 November 2017 11:52:05 UTC-4, Keith Brown wrote:
>
> Are there any native golang tools simar to this which work on
> Windows/Linux/OSX?
>
The Skylark interpreter doesn't make any particular assumptions about the
CPU or OS, so it should be highly portable. Please file an issue if
Cool tool.
Are there any native golang tools simar to this which work on
Windows/Linux/OSX?
On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 9:42:27 PM UTC-4, Ben Hoyt wrote:
>
> That looks really neat. I will dive into the code!
>
> I'm very curious how the performance of Skylark in Go compares to Skylark
>
That looks really neat. I will dive into the code!
I'm very curious how the performance of Skylark in Go compares to Skylark
in Java (and CPython 3.6 for that matter) -- any benchmarks on that?
-Ben
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 12:39:43 PM UTC-4, Alan Donovan wrote:
>
> I'm pleased to announ
This looks neat. Are you able to provide more context on what this is/will
be used for at Google?
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 12:39:43 PM UTC-4, Alan Donovan wrote:
>
> I'm pleased to announce the launch of Skylark in Go: an interpreter for
> Skylark, implemented in Go.
>
> github.com/
This looks super cool, btw. I've been wanting a way to extend go programs,
and lua wasn't really doing it for me. Python(ish) is much more
comfortable for most people, I'd think. Can't wait to try it out.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golan
15 matches
Mail list logo
