The ycombinator post shows so many misunderstandings of the basic issue, it’s
seriously sad. Here are some:
1. S-expression syntax does not mean it’s the same semantics.
2. The means of implementation in Racket are radically different from a
lexer-parser approach.
3. The nature of languages ranges from
— stand-alone languages with ugly syntax (example: datalog)
— #lang stand-alone DSLs (config, scribble)
— #lang language mixins (s-expr, 2d)
— embedded DSLs with mostly coarse-grained interactions with Racket
(redex)
— embedded DSLs with fine-grained interaction with Racket (the language
of class syntax; syntax-parse: the pattern and templated languages, which
interact via syn-pattern vars)
All of these are available via libraries. And I am almost sure I am
forgetting some classes of languages here.
I suspect that if we collected the languages in just these categories, we’d
easily find over a hundred if not several hundred in both our code base as well
as external code repos.
Thanks for taking up the battle against this lack of knowledge out there —
Matthias
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
