Lambda with short syntax powered by macros

[Ed Ryzhov]

Hi, just wanted to let you know that I wrote a small library that implements the lambda via macros.

It is here - https://github.com/ryzed/LambdaMacro

Tests show an increase in performance compared to a conventional lambda to 20 times.

Link to the test - http://gametrax.eu/game/35a3c97a95 (warning, can be slow!)

Hope someone finds it useful, especially for games.

And thanks to Simon Krajewski for hxshort.

Best,

Ed.

[Simon Krajewski]

Am 13.07.2013 07:41, schrieb Ed Ryzhov:
> Hi, just wanted to let you know that I wrote a small library that
> implements the lambda via macros.
>
> It is here - https://github.com/ryzed/LambdaMacro
>
> Tests show an increase in performance compared to a conventional
> lambda to 20 times.
> Link to the test - http://gametrax.eu/game/35a3c97a95 (warning, can be
> slow!)
>
> Hope someone finds it useful, especially for games.

Looks good!

You may want to change your arguments from Expr to ExprOf<Iterable<T>>
etc. so completion doesn't show up in inappropriate places. Also, you
have to consider empty iterables when working with code like
"$a.iterator().next()", which may return null.

Simon

[Ed Ryzhov]

On Saturday, July 13, 2013 11:11:45 AM UTC+4, Simon Krajewski wrote:

Also, you have to consider empty iterables when working with code like  
"$a.iterator().next()", which may return null. 

This is a trick to infer the type, it is not executed at runtime.

For example this code:

class NullIteratorTest
{
public function new() { }
public function hasNext():Bool return false;
public function next():Int return 0;
}
class NullIterableTest
{
public function new() { }
public function iterator():NullIteratorTest return null;
}

var t:NullIterableTest = null;
var a = t.array();

will generate correct code and show runtime null pointer exception as usual.

But you're right, I added a checks to the impossibility of type inference.

And completion hints too.

Best,

Ed.

[Simon Krajewski]

Why do you have to manually infer the type at all?

Simon

[Ed Ryzhov]

Why do you have to manually infer the type at all?

I thought I would need to specify the type when I create a List<T>, never used it.

Now checked, there is no need.

Thanks, I'll fix it.