Can someone explain what this is? Why it's a good thing? What's it's for? I have to admit based on reading the post I have absolutely no idea.
Instead of working on "real" problems, I find myself battling untyped/undocumented YAML/JSON configurations, syncing JSON encoders/decoders, massaging incompatible dependencies, writing unholy SQL, etc.
I obviously don't have all the answers, but a system with the following properties seems like a worthwhile pursuit: (1) small enough to be used like JSON yet powerful enough to used like Javascript, (2) cryptographic guarantees that code is compatible over time, (3) a compiler that checks live servers for compatibility before deploying, (4) simple but expressive type system, (5) a package manager that facilitates all of this at a granular level... and so on.
On top of all that, I think these properties lend themselves to some grand ambitions like "a new internet" and a "google-docs live coding editor experience". Maybe I'm just full of myself though haha
scrapscript.py is the first real attempt at making scrapscript a reality, so some folks who feel these pains are getting excited to see some movement on the project.
EDIT: Here’s my recent scrapyard demo, if you want to see it in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SngOLU5G1Eg
I think scrapscript is a really interesting idea, mind, this isn't a "here's an alternative" type comment, it's a "here's things that I think are neat in a similar way to how I think scrapscript is neat" :)
Edit: I forgot something! https://trout.me.uk/lisp/termite-r7rs.pdf is a paper on adding library support to the cross-network (kinda erlangish) termite scheme extensions - and leans heavily on content addressable-ness. Termite itself has gone the way of small lisp projects but I kept this around specifically for the content addressable stuff having been solidly worked out in a language I understood; maybe that'll come in handy for ideas for you as well.
What does this mean? You hash dependencies?
> (3) a compiler that checks live servers for compatibility before deploying,
Why does a compiler need to talk to a server? Why should it? Seems like a huge step backwards in what a compiler is and expecting it to work later on.
Yes, but everything is hashed at the expression-level rather than at the file-level, which prevents a few classes of errors.
> Why does a compiler need to talk to a server? Why should it? Seems like a huge step backwards in what a compiler is and expecting it to work later on.
Imagine if Javascript tooling could throw an error when a client implementation diverges from the server's expected input/output types:
> const res = await fetch("https://example.com/api", [1, 2, 3]);
ERROR: You're sending this REST endpoint a list of integers, but it expects a string!
I feel your pain on having to manage so many dependencies. I write primarily in Python, and the various pip / Pipenv / pipx / PDM / Poetry dependency managers drive me pretty crazy. That's not even accounting for the multiple Python versions I need!
That said, I'm surprised that you're trying to _alleviate_ this by implementing your FP language in Python. The Python ecosystem is full of half-documented config files, incompatible dependency trees, etc.
Have you considered implementing it in any other languages after the Python one proves its worth? For example, if the language becomes strong enough, would you consider writing a scrapscript compiler in scrapscript, itself?
Max has already started working on a meta scrapscript compiler: https://github.com/tekknolagi/scrapscript/pull/100
One thing I think we all agree on is that the implementations should be simple enough to easily port themselves to other languages. For example, one could probably port the existing scrapscript.py to Rust or Javascript using GPT in a single weekend.
You can see echoes of what I'm talking about in my tiny JS POC: https://github.com/tekknolagi/scrapscript/blob/trunk/scrapsc...
Some languages like Rust and Go put a lot of weight on the "official" implementation. I think scrapscript can be more like Lisp/Json where the spec guides parallel implementations. There are obvious downsides to this in general, but I think that content-addressability makes some of those problems moot.