| To: | scsh@martigny.ai.mit.edu |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Perl, English, syntax for Scheme and shells (was Re: scsh in scm ...) |
| From: | gunter@netcom2.netcom.com (Mike Gunter) |
| Date: | Tue, 9 Jan 1996 08:12:01 GMT |
| Organization: | NETCOM On-line services |
In article <4cgbbj$slm@nkosi.well.com> djello@well.sf.ca.us (Darius Bacon) writes: Paul Wilson proposed a syntax for shell programming: > 1. Common special forms like IF use balanced keywords (maybe palindromic, > as above, maybe not) which act as implicit parentheses as well as > specifying which special form is meant. I think you can get the benefits of this idea with a loop-macro style of syntax, like so: (define (gosh wow) (let (x = (* wow wow)) (y = 42) in (if foo then (+ x y) else (- x)))) In Haskell, this is: gosh wow = let x = wow * wow y = 42 in if foo then x + y else (- x) I believe Haskell is worth checking out if you're designing a syntax (or any other aspect of a language, really.) One good starting point for more info is: http://www.cs.yale.edu/HTML/YALE/CS/haskell/yale-fp.html cheers, mike gunter |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Perl, English, syntax for Scheme and shells (was Re: scsh in scm ...), Robert |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Perl, English, syntax for Scheme and shells (was Re: scsh in scm ...), Juergen Koslowski |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Perl, English, syntax for Scheme and shells (was Re: scsh in scm ...), Paul R. Wilson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Perl, English, syntax for Scheme and shells (was Re: scsh in scm ...), spot |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |