Blorp Language

Why is `pure` a keyword that needs to be added, with impure being the default? This discourages programmers from marking functions as pure. I like how Nim does it, with `func` declaring a function (pure) and `proc` declaring a procedure (impure).

Readable syntax with mandatory indentation is a very questionable idea. For me its easier to understand that something ends with a specific designation, not with a lack of it. Indentation should be solved by formatter and not the language.

And I don't quite understand the memory model, is it something similar to Rust?

"Blorp" is the notional noise of kimchi or sauerkraut fermenting as the carbon dioxide escapes the airlock. Vigorous fermentation can be described as "the kimchi is really blorping along today". It's almost onomatopoetic, but not quite.

We ferment wine or beer in a different vessel with different airlock, so it does not blorp. We don't have a word for that yet.

The crock we used that birthed this word is this one:

https://www.lehmans.com/product/striped-european-style-ferme...

"${name}: ${features.join(", ")}"

This is in the very first example you see on the site. If it's a mistake, that's not encouraging. If this is actually how the language works, that's even less encouraging -- the syntax highlighter doesn't even get it right!

Interesting. there are some parts i like a lot here, but two things that I really dislike syntax wise. One is the lean towards a chainable syntax - this has proven to a big footgun for many devs in both java streams and typescript, making it very easy to go from O(n) to O(2n). The other part i really dislike is the first argument principle noted. If i myself define `string_and_reverse` and I can call it both through `string_and_reverse(42)` and `42.string_and_reverse()` i could definitely see this leading to some very funky looking chaining.

Perhaps it's just one point from me - not liking chaining :D

I know there are people that are used to the indention based scope but that has a real problem when it comes to copy/pasting code. I think a alternative that still looks pretty clean is to do like Ruby and Julia and have the function/class imply begin and have a literal 'end'.

I applaud the effort, but every time there's a new hobbyist programming language on HN, almost always it's something I've already seen in countless other hobbyist languages, just a slight variation of it based on the author's personal tastes. It doesn't tell me why I should adopt it over language X. What I'd like to see is exploration of novel practical ideas that would make certain types of projects much faster to write/read compared to most other languages.

For example, a typical web service I work on:

    - uses JSON APIs
    - it's fully stateless (uses external DBs/caches for persistence)
    - has the concepts of value objects, entities, architectural layers (app, domain, infra), ports/adapters etc.
    - only entities are proper rich objects, while most of the code is stateless services that operate on requests + entities + value objects
    - stateless services are composed (via interfaces) into a dependency tree (stored in the dependency container)

    module my_service

    layer app {
        service Adder {   // stateless service
            uses base int // a value-based dependency, injected in the container below

            method add(x int) int {
                return base + x
            }
        }

        service Doubler {
            uses a Adder  // delegates to another service

            method double(x int) int {
                return a.add(x) + a.add(x)
            }
        }
    }

    container {       // dependency container construction with injections
        A = Adder { base: 10 }
        D = Doubler { a: A }
    }

    // automatically generates a web server that exposes a JSON API with method "double" and accepts the "n" argument
    endpoint double(n int) int {
        return D.double(n)
    }

What do you think? Does it make sense? It basically moves something usually implemented by a framework into the language, but that's the entire point: a language optimized for writing compact, architecturally safe stateless services in a few lines of code. For example, since we know a request's memory is bound to that request (no global state), we can have very optimized memory management without a full GC => improved latency. Or for example, we can have compile-time checks for things like dependency direction validation (i.e. the domain layer cannot reference the infrastructure layer) to keep the architecture clean, etc.

It looks nice. The general syntax isn't explained AFAICT?

Looks somewhat Python-like but modernised (great!) - is it indentation sensitive?

Is it just me that doesnt like automatically returning the last statement in functions? It makes it hard to see where a function returns, and I dont see how you would do a guard clause at the start of a function without having the entire rest of the function in an else block

Feels like CoffeeScript for C, in the best way

I like it. Reminds me of ruby. maybe a more verbose/explicit go? cool stuff!

Is it vibe coded?

[dead]

Blorp? Is ths the sound your underwear makes after eating at an Indian eatery?