Destroyed Roadmap (markdown)
This commit is contained in:
Andreas Rumpf
parent
ae0585c104
commit
f38ef4713f
134
Roadmap.md
134
Roadmap.md
|
|
@ -1,134 +0,0 @@
|
||||||
<table>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<th>Language feature</th>
|
|
||||||
<th>Scheduled for</th>
|
|
||||||
<th>Notes</th>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Automatic dereference in more contexts</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>implemented but needs to be activated via the .experimental switch</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>a.f() and f(a) are rewritten to f(a[]) if overloading resolution fails completely. This rewrite is only performed for the first argument</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Implement static[T] properly</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>for version 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>The implementation has lots of issues, but what's worse the spec is not nearly clear enough and seems to conflate 2 different ideas.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>asFunc pragma</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>After 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>provides a nice bridge from 'var T' to 'returns T'; can be entirely implemented as a macro with the upcoming types API
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Pragmas are not supported for 'bindSym'</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>this makes clean macros impossible to write when it comes to pragmas</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Alias analysis needs to specified and controllable with pragmas</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>alias analysis affects memory safety rules</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Destructors need to interact with finalizers</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>destructors and finalizers are implemented, but do not interact. <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">new</span></tt> which takes a finalizer needs to be deprecated. People should use a destructor instead. However, destructors should ultimately depend on an escape analysis.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td><tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">~</span></tt> Operator for effects</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>it is not entirely clear what <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">~F</span></tt> should mean.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Prevent object branch transitions from low(selector)</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>object branch transitions from low(selector) are allowed, because they are simply too useful, but can break memory safety. Now that the language has a proper notion of construction, we can make them safe.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Push pragma needs to be reworked</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>it should be distinguished between 'push' for 'type', 'proc' etc.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Returning 'var T' is unsafe and needs static analysis to make safe</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>the compiler already checks for trivial examples</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Some effects like <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">GCMem</span></tt> don't need to be white-listed</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>unclear whether this only affects built-in properties like <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">GCMem</span></tt>, <tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">Recursive</span></tt>.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Term rewriting macros need more love</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>we need much more tests and use them in production</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Weaken the requirements for forward declarations</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>two different design ideas exist: one conservative and so will work, the other highly experimental</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Write tracking</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>algorithm exists. Can be extended to compute lent pointers.</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
</table>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<br>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<table>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<th>Compiler feature</th>
|
|
||||||
<th>Scheduled for</th>
|
|
||||||
<th>Notes</th>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>High level optimizer</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>use the effect system for optimizations; interacts with TR macros;
|
|
||||||
performs:<ul>
|
|
||||||
<li>GCSE</li>
|
|
||||||
<li>loop invariant hoisting</li>
|
|
||||||
<li>escape analysis for string/seq</li>
|
|
||||||
<li>inlining of small lambdas</li>
|
|
||||||
</ul>
|
|
||||||
</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>GPU backend</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr><td>Pure RC'ing GC</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>unknown</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>important for better interoperability with Objective-C</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<tr>
|
|
||||||
<td>Symbol files</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>after 1.0</td>
|
|
||||||
<td>symbol files provide true incremental compilation beyond the caching of generated C code</td>
|
|
||||||
</tr>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
</table>
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue