C-omega, Microsoft Research's experimental language featuring asynchronous concurrency (formerly, Polyphonic C#) and XML data types (Xen), is now available for download.

I think this is an interesting project. It was discussed here several times in the past.

I think that the integration of the new features with the core language is quite nice (e.g., XML types and the type system), so I suggest taking a look even if you are not particularly in favor of embedding XML in programming language.

The Cw home page includes links to relevant papers. And here's a LtU discussion of Xen and a discussion of Polyphonic C#.

The ongoing LtU discussion.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


It's been a long while since I coded any PHP. Lately I read that the new version allows your PHP programs to interact with information in a XML document as if these pieces of information were arrays and objects. Does anyone know the details?

Much like gnosis.xml in Python

I imagine that many people have independently come up with little libraries to convert, say, nested dictionaries or tuples (or s-expressions) into XML output and vice versa. I don't think that what PHP5 has is much more than that.

ONLamp article here.

Apparently it's a "new and unique" feature...


Does anybody know how complete the XPath implementation is in SimpleXML? That looks rather nice. I think the PEAK framework for Python has something similar: if you connect objects together using Peak.Binding you can query the object hierarchy with a path-based syntax.

Declarative query languages for traversing object graphs are a cool idea.

Is Oz declarative?

Dominic:Declarative query languages for traversing object graphs are a cool idea.

Having spent some time reading Mozart- and SEAM-related papers, I now see all graphs as representation of program state (a hammer and a nail pattern).
If we stretch definition of "declarative query language" a bit, can we say that it fits Alice? Or at least SML? Pattern matching (and unification) can be probably expressed with "path-based syntax"...
XPath with closures and futures... Will it kill the XPath spirit (of simplicity)?

Dependent types...

...would add even more power to XPath...