about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/screen.mu
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 3861 - screen untouched when entering console modeKartik K. Agaram2017-05-181-0/+1
|
* 3851Kartik K. Agaram2017-05-101-1/+1
|
* 3380Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-1/+1
| | | | | One more place we were missing expanding type abbreviations: inside container definitions.
* 3379Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-171-4/+4
| | | | Can't use type abbreviations inside 'memory-should-contain'.
* 3189Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-141-2/+1
|
* 2735 - define recipes using 'def'Kartik K. Agaram2016-03-081-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | I'm dropping all mention of 'recipe' terminology from the Readme. That way I hope to avoid further bike-shedding discussions while I very slowly decide on the right terminology with my students. I could be smarter in my error messages and use 'recipe' when code uses it and 'function' otherwise. But what about other words like ingredient? It would all add complexity that I'm not yet sure is worthwhile. But I do want separate experiences for veteran programmers reading about Mu on github and for people learning programming using Mu.
* 2576 - distinguish allocated addresses from othersKartik K. Agaram2016-01-191-1/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is the one major refinement on the C programming model I'm planning to introduce in mu. Instead of Rust's menagerie of pointer types and static checking, I want to introduce just one new type, and use it to perform ref-counting at runtime. So far all we're doing is updating new's interface. The actual ref-counting implementation is next. One implication: I might sometimes need duplicate implementations for a recipe with allocated vs vanilla addresses of the same type. So far it seems I can get away with just always passing in allocated addresses; the situations when you want to pass an unallocated address to a recipe should be few and far between.
* 2548 - teach 'print' to print integersKartik K. Agaram2015-12-281-1/+2
| | | | | | | | | | Still can't print non-integer numbers, so this is a bit hacky. The big consequence is that you can't print literal characters anymore because of our rules about how we pick which variant to statically dispatch to. You have to save to a character variable first. Maybe I can add an annotation to literals..
* 2468 - overload print-character as just 'print'Kartik K. Agaram2015-11-211-2/+2
|
* 1868 - start using naked literals everywhereKartik K. Agaram2015-07-281-18/+18
| | | | First step to reducing typing burden. Next step: inferring types.
* 1618Kartik K. Agaram2015-06-211-2/+2
|
* 1617Kartik K. Agaram2015-06-211-7/+7
|
* 1476 - fake screens support colorKartik K. Agaram2015-05-261-1/+1
|
* 1363 - rename 'integer' to 'number'Kartik K. Agaram2015-05-131-1/+1
| | | | ..now that we support non-integers.
* 1345Kartik K. Agaram2015-05-111-1/+5
|
* 1276 - make C++ version the defaultKartik K. Agaram2015-05-051-0/+23
I've tried to update the Readme, but there are at least a couple of issues.
>365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513