Annex A: Design philosophy#

Crochet was born to make programming interactive fiction games more accessible to writers and artists—or rather, more accessible to non-professional programmers who want to use computers for their own creative endeavours.

Both Core Crochet and Surface Crochet have evolved a lot since them, but they still embody much of this philosophy. If the language was described in a single sentence, it would be: “A tool for safely experimenting with interactive computer art.” For a broader meaning of “art,” that covers any creative uses of computers.

Design principles#

Core to this goal are three tenets:

“Safety comes first!”#

If we want people to experiment and collaborate in programming, we must provide them with a safe environment to do so. Collaboration isn’t optional, there is no way of building any modern software without relying on other people’s code. And as soon as we accept it, we also need to accept that the threats to safe experimentation aren’t just accidental damage; we must also protect people from malicious actors.

Crochet goes through great lengths to make experimentation safer: adopting the Principle of Least Authority, using Capability Security, isolating effects with Algebraic Effect Handlers (this is important to avoid accidental damage during experimentation), and controlling resource usage through Computational Zones.

“Privacy is required for safety!”#

Security problems may have immediately visible consequences, but privacy problems don’t always have that. However, both of these can make people feel unsafe, and both of them have the potential of harming actual people. Therefore, if we’re aiming for a safe experimentation platform, we must value privacy as much as we value security.

The combination of security and privacy-respecting code requires us to treat all pieces of code as “untrusted and potentially dangerous”. So Crochet approaches privacy through ideas from Information Flow combined with ideas from Capability Security. The way it actually addresses the problem does not provide any non-interference guarantees, but the guarantees it does provide are often reasonable for the domains Crochet aims for.

“Rich, immediate feedback is key to experiment”#

When we’re experimenting with an idea, we may approach it from different angles we want to observe what the effects of all of these approaches are, how they compare to each other. We want to understand, and sometimes this “understanding” requires comparisons as well.

Programming tools often fall short of addressing this, and instead focus on static reasoning, requiring people to learn and reproduce all of the semantics by heart in order to figure out the effects of certain changes. Meanwhile, data science tends to rely a lot more on observations of data with things like interactive notebooks.

Live-programming, immediate feedback, and direct manipulation aren’t exactly new concepts in programming language tools, but they are often not well integrated or flexible. The confinement of most REPL tools to the command line does them a disservice by limiting too much of the data representation and interaction—because you want to interact with it, explore specific cases, figure out patterns in it, understand how they relate to your program.

So Crochet takes a tooling-first approach, preferring features that lend themselves well to immediate feedback and hot-patching (required for live-programming), as well as allowing people to choose different representations for the same piece of data, and different ways of manipulating it (direct manipulations or programmatic manipulations). This is one of the reasons Crochet limits things like lambdas, which are so common in functional languages, and approaches interactive programming through the idea of Program Versioning.

Language domains#

Although people often categorise languages like Crochet as “general-purpose,” the category is unhelpful in understanding the language’s tradeoffs, usage, and philosophy. So, instead, Crochet is very explicit with the domains it’s optimised for.

Interactive fiction#

The original motivation to design a language like Crochet was to make it easier to build Interactive Fiction games, particularly ones with strongly independent, AI-driven NPCs. The term “Interactive Fiction” here covers many narrative-driven (and adjacent) games such as Visual Novels, RPGs, and Environmental Simulations.

Crochet helps these games with a Symbolic Logic sub-language that relies on a Global Fact Database. A Simulation sub-language allows expressing game rules (and game agents’ behaviour) declaratively, and in a way that allows the runtime to verify and optimise their execution.

Software verification#

It turns out that Model Checking falls quite closely to the idea of expressing game rules in a declarative and verifiable manner. Crochet lends itself better to Stochastic Model Checking (such as Property-Based Testing), and Bounded Model Checking, since there are usability features of the underlying symbolic logic that prevent translations to common model checking tools.

Crochet’s Algebraic Effect Handlers and Tracing Debugger provide a very good basis for applying model checking to external languages, in ways that are recordable, reproducible, and interactively explorable going both forwards and backwards in time. The Simulation sub-language allows one to express these models in concise ways, in similar fashion to tools such as Alloy.

Cross-platform automation#

Crochet’s approach to interactive experimentation, along with the idea of Algebraic Effect Handlers and Capability Security, provides a safe way for people to play around with software automation. The Interactive Playground provides richer feedback than what is possible with common Shells (such as Bash, Fish, etc), while at the same time being cross-platform and reproducible (one can turn a playground session into an actual program).

The playground is particularly nice with potentially destructive operations, as it offers the possibility of “dry-running” for free, without any changes to the code, underlying programs, or even online services. Reproducibility follows the same, with the possibility of recording and replaying sessions without hitting external services.

The obvious drawbacks here are that common *nix tools need to be reimplemented in Crochet, but since this is a domain Crochet aims to excel at, reimplementing these tools with the mentioned features and reasonable performance is a goal for the standard library as well.

Procedural generation#

Some games, such as Roguelikes, rely a lot on procedurally generated content, but this is often useful for Interactive Fiction and simulations as well. The Simulation sub-language’s use of Stochastic Search allows some common procedural algorithms to be written declaratively in Crochet.

Further, supporting Interactive Fiction with strong AIs also requires work on things such as procedural dialogues, and these same tools can be used for non-game procedural content such as Twitter bots.

Language tools#

Crochet is a “language-driven” system, through the lenses that we interact with computational concepts through languages; Even “direct manipulation” forms a language, where the ways in which we can manipulate things is dictated by a set of composable rules. A system like this, heavily dependent on tooling, needs ways in which users can extend the system to fit their own context. This means that Crochet has to support user-extensible IDEs, user-extensible Debuggers, user-extensible REPLs, etc. And these users should be able to modify any aspect of these tools to fit new languages (interactions, manipulations, rules, etc).

To this end Crochet is somewhat similar to Language Workbenches, such as Spoofax, but also similar to other “language-driven” systems, such as Racket and Glamorous Toolkit.