Re: Ruby aka MatzLisp

Ken Tilton wrote:
Stefan Scholl wrote:
Ruby is a language designed in the following steps:

* take a simple lisp language (like one prior to CL).
* remove macros, s-expression.

Oops.

* add an idiotic read syntax that can't figure out whether it's Algol,
Fortran or C. Nested blocks end by mixtures of end } end end } } end
} ...

* add simple object system (much simpler than CLOS).

Uh-oh.

Simple things for simple minds.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Do people dislike parentheses or the conceptual mismatch with trees?
    ... If the S-expression is well-formed ... Our meta-models are called macros. ... Checking well-formedness of the S-expression is often poorly ... poor checking of its baroque syntax in most implementations ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • explicit renaming in terms of syntax-case
    ... In order to implement hygienic macros I ... explicit renaming macros in terms of syntax-case macros. ... (cons (deep-expose-syntax (syntax head)) ...
    (comp.lang.scheme)
  • Re: ANN: TwinLisp - a new way of programming in Common Lisp
    ... Note that his response to this situation was to contribute to the creation of a new language, Dylan, which does not use s-expressions either for syntax or internal representation. ... This is largely because the algol syntax of Dylan was carefully thought out as an integral part of a new and different language compiler, not a bolt-on hack to an existing language whose whole design assumes s-expression syntax. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Two questions together
    ... > "programmable language" and as far as I know this feature is provided ... There are macros and read-macros. ... syntax you need read-macros. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Scheme macros
    ... macro transformer is a syntax object, ... > starting from a defmacro perspective. ... > beyond just macros. ... then there's value in the Scheme macro ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)