Re: [racket-users] Re: Little language design/implementation guidance

2019-02-13 Thread Stephen De Gabrielle
On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 21:36, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > [...] > I don’t think this is a linear order. It’s more like a landscape with dots > and connections and hyper-edges and such. In particular, > Thanks. I feel like I need to do a ‘topic map’ (like my niece does in school) to get my head a

Re: [racket-users] Re: Little language design/implementation guidance

2019-02-13 Thread Matthias Felleisen
> On Feb 13, 2019, at 10:24 AM, Stephen De Gabrielle > wrote: > > • programmer (without compilers course) > • did compilers at degree level (can still remember it and it covered > design decisions, as opposed to algorithms and data structures) > • Beautiful Racket and/or/ h

Re: [racket-users] Re: Little language design/implementation guidance

2019-02-13 Thread Stephen De Gabrielle
Thank you Neil, George and Matthias. I'm interested in the HCI advice, where they impact both the language developer and the language user(s): - [avoid]* "Lack of abstraction mechanisms" [DH]* - *"figuring out what your composable primitives are." [DH]* - [avoid] *"Reinventing lexical sc

Re: [racket-users] Re: Little language design/implementation guidance

2019-02-08 Thread Matthias Felleisen
> On Feb 7, 2019, at 7:32 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > > but it might just be easier to just get a professorship instead (also > nontrivial). :) Absolutely. * How many academic PL experts do you know that design languages? * How many of their languages reach an audience of more than 7? *

Re: [racket-users] Re: Little language design/implementation guidance

2019-02-07 Thread Neil Van Dyke
George Neuner wrote on 2/7/19 12:43 PM: No offense to Herman, but I think the problem with consulting experts is that there are relatively few language experts who are available to consult. I suspect there's so very little *market* for such little language experts.  Some non-exhaustive sugges