tomoaki/hakorune
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
c8063c9e41485ed9f976cbf9cd71c04bfb7f57b2
hakorune/docs/comparison/nyash-vs-others.md
Selfhosting Dev c8063c9e41 pyvm: split op handlers into ops_core/ops_box/ops_ctrl; add ops_flow + intrinsic; delegate vm.py without behavior change 
net-plugin: modularize constants (consts.rs) and sockets (sockets.rs); remove legacy commented socket code; fix unused imports
mir: move instruction unit tests to tests/mir_instruction_unit.rs (file lean-up); no semantic changes
runner/pyvm: ensure using pre-strip; misc docs updates

Build: cargo build ok; legacy cfg warnings remain as before
2025-09-21 08:53:00 +09:00

1.2 KiB
Raw Blame History

Nyash vs Other Languages — Feature Comparison

Perspective

  • Nyash emphasizes a unified Box model, hygienic AST macros with sandboxing, and multi‑backend execution (PyVM/LLVM/Cranelift/WASM).

Axes

  • Control Flow & SSA
    • Nyash: explicit observability (hints), PHI hygiene invariants.
    • Rust/Swift/Kotlin: SSA is internal; limited direct observability.
  • Exceptions
    • Nyash: postfix catch/cleanup (scope‑first), zero‑cost lowering.
    • Rust: Result/? idiom (no exceptions). Swift/Kotlin: try/catch/finally.
  • Macros
    • Nyash: AST JSON v0, hygienic by construction, isolated child with capabilities.
    • C: text macro. Rust: macro_rules!/proc‑macros. Lisp/Julia: homoiconic AST.
  • Scope
    • Nyash: ScopeBox (compile‑time metadata) and ScopeEnter/Leave hints; disappears at runtime.
    • Go/Rust/Swift: lexical scopes (no explicit observability layer).
  • Backends
    • Nyash: PyVM (reference semantics), LLVM (AOT), Cranelift (JIT), WASM.
    • Others: single backend or VM.

Takeaways

  • Nyash’s differentiator is “observability without cost” and macro safety by default.
  • Where trade‑offs exist (e.g., temporary hygiene valves), they’re gated and documented.