Re: [OT] PostLisp, a language experiment

From: Will Hartung (willh_at_msoft.com)
Date: 03/11/05 

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:55:39 -0800

"Ulrich Hobelmann" <u.hobelmann@web.de> wrote in message
news:39a9ueF5spo2dU1@individual.net...
> (Sorry for crossposting this. If you specifically refer to one language
> family only, please post the answer only to one group.)
>
> There are several things I (and others) don't really like about Lisp and
> Forth, but most live with it. Today I set out to try a mix of both to
> see, how certain things improve.
>
> IMHO the worst thing in Lisp is its many parentheses. While they do a
> great job in structuring the language and allowing features such as
> variable numbers of arguments and macros, they turn every program into a
> ragged tree (while a Forth function typically is one or two lines). I
> don't say this is terrible, but I thought I might try to improve on it.
>
> The worst thing about Forth IMHO is the stack clutter. When every
> function has some swaps, dups, overs and nips in it, it takes
> concentration to keep track of the stack in your mind. Sure, there are
> stack comments, but when you write those, you might just as well use
> local variables instead.

You really should go and look at HP's RPL. This is really a fabulous
language, IMHO.

Reverse Polish Lisp is strikingly concise and powerful.

You get a lot of the dynamism of a Lisp, with the "simplicity" of a Forth
like syntax.

You can look here for a nice description of it.

http://www.systella.fr/~bertrand/rpl2/english.html

Regards,

Will Hartung
(willh@msoft.com)

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [OT] PostLisp, a language experiment
    ... a preconception that there isn't a language for which longer ... > latter method in Lisp, and C and many other languages so that the code ... >> apparently no runtime checks for stack mismatches, ... > the complexity and number of stack items for each definition. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: [OT] PostLisp, a language experiment
    ... >>latter method in Lisp, and C and many other languages so that the code ... >>the complexity and number of stack items for each definition. ... I do the same thing with my assembly language code, my Java code, my C++ ... >>useless to any experienced Lisp programmer. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: ILC2005: McCarthy denounces Common Lisp, "Lisp", XML, and Rahul
    ... >> the language should be available to users. ... In the design of Common Lisp, I asked Dave Moon (one of the architects ... Now, there are good kinds of low-level, like the way that floats are ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: [OT] PostLisp, a language experiment
    ... But if your language ... On the Lisp side, we have our dogmatists as well, but Common Lisp ... value from the user stack. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: [OT] PostLisp, a language experiment
    ... my discussion with John Doty was based on stack ... I already have a language in which I can write long ... latter method in Lisp, and C and many other languages so that the code ... > apparently no runtime checks for stack mismatches, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)