Add better toString representation

[chermehdi]

Built-in types need better toString representation for debugging purposes.

Values and especially functions only show the type, we want something that shows the type signature as well.

[anouard24]

I propose that we drop the word Comet in the start of types like CometInt or CometFunc, and a representation like in the Python world for complexe types:

7    ==> Int(7)
"is" ==> Str("is")
0..9 ==> Range(0, 9)

// for complexe types:
func add(a, b) {a+b}
var arr = [1, "2", 3..4, add]

add  ==> <func add(a, b)>
Data ==> <struct Data{a, c}>
arr  ==> [Int(1), Str("2"), Range(3, 4), <func add(a, b)>]

This is just my style, we can discuss it or improve it 😉

[chermehdi]

Comet prefix is necessary to differentiate between comet types and none-comet types (that would be introduced by interoperability in the future), so If you wanna go that way, we can have another implementation of toString in the standard library.

• the public toString one that should be used by the standard library would output stuff without the Comet prefix.
• a toStringDebug that is available for use for the people working on the interpreter/standard library internals/tests.

Feel free to show interest if you want to work on this.

[anouard24]

That sounds cool! the public one without Comet is good for developer experience.
I will work on this when I have a spare time.

[chermehdi]

SGTM!