> On Mar 1, 2019, at 12:05 PM, Stephen De Gabrielle <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Matthias,
> (or anyone else who is available to answer :))
>
> I'm trying to get my head around the range of possible languages in Racket.
>
> You got me thinking how many languages seem to have embedded little
> languages.
> I was wondering how they fit into your categories of languages?
>
> 3. The nature of languages ranges from
> — stand-alone languages with ugly syntax (example: datalog)
> — #lang stand-alone DSLs (config, scribble)
>
> Does '#lang video' fit in this group?
Yes.
>
> — #lang language mixins (s-expr, 2d)
>
> Do regular #px""/#rx expressions fit in this category?
I don’t understand how #px is similar to the s-expr or at-expr or 2d #lang
mixins. I am referring to lines such as #lang at-exp scribble.
>
> — embedded DSLs with mostly coarse-grained interactions with Racket
> (redex)
>
> would racket/class fit in this group?
I classified it with the next bullet.
> would (require sql) fit in this group?
I think so. I haven’t used it.
> — 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)
>
> Do regular #px""/#rx expressions fit in this category?
I still don’t understand what you mean here.
— Matthias
p.s. In my mind, format and regexp-match (and similar functions) are
interpreters for programs in DSLs that are written down as strings. That’s my
opening slides for HtDL (from last year).
--
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.
