> On Mar 1, 2019, at 2:29 PM, Aidan Gauland <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2/03/19 3:27 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>> On Mar 1, 2019, at 2:15 AM, Aidan Gauland <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 24/02/19 12:08 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2. The means of implementation in Racket are radically different from a
>>>> lexer-parser approach.
>>>>
>>> Wait, does this mean that the Beautiful Racket book is leading me down the
>>> wrong path? I'm in the middle of the bf chapter
>>> <https://beautifulracket.com/bf/>
>>> , which (if I am understanding it correctly, is using a lexer and a parser.
>>>
>> Please read this comment in context. This line is a response to a particular
>> point raised in the Reddit link of the original post. On this Reddit thread,
>> someone seems to confuse creating DSLs with writing new syntax for
>> more-or-less standard semantic concepts. For such people, it matters to find
>> a conventional Lex-Yacc (replace with modern words) tool chain plus perhaps
>> some support for backend creation.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
> I apologise for missing the context; I did take a look at the thread, but I
> still misunderstood your remark initially. Thanks for the clarification.
My response wasn’t meant as a rebuke. I really just wanted to say “the one-line
statement is oversimplifying and you really need to look at the Reddit thread
to understand its implications.” — 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.
