James Clark comments

Results 508 comments of


                                            James Clark

Improve mocking in test framework

The approach of using an annotation on a class definition to say that it is a mock for another class will be hard to make work when the class is...

Improve mocking in test framework

@sameerajayasoma I think dynamicNew handles your use case intuitively: ``` Foo x = object:dynamicNew({get: i => i == 10 ? "ten": ""}); ``` I am relying on the compiler to...

Improve mocking in test framework

Can't we do this? ``` http:HttpClient x = object:dynamicNew({ get: (url, message, targetType) => new http:Response }); ```

Improve mocking in test framework

Don't think that will type-check. Optional parameters are optional for callers not for subtypes.

Define how E[x] maps onto get and put methods for objects

Relates to #85.

Define how E[x] maps onto get and put methods for objects

This is straightforward for usage in expressions, but much harder for usage in lvalues.

Improve taint checking feature

Paper on dynamic taint analysis using Truffle (from Oracle): https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3426182.3426184

Incorrect static type of `x?.att` when x has type xml:Element

I think we did the typing of attribute access before we had `xml:Element`. I think it is useful to allow `x?.att` when x has type `xml`, but it is not...

Refinement types

Better syntax: ``` type-definition := "type" identifier type-descriptor [type-constraint] ";" type-constraint :="where" expression ``` The expression in a type-constraint is boolean expression, in which `identifier` is bound to a value...

Refinement types

See also [Refinement types in Jolie](https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.06823).