[Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

DavidLeibs david.leibs at gmail.com
Tue Feb 28 12:23:29 EST 2017


 The ES6 design is sound and if you are in a hurry to get the capability it
is a great way to go. Once you start using it and get a taste for
quasi-literal little languages you will find that you want more.

Having a quasi-literal that let's you name the little language to parse you
open a very interesting door. After the dust settles you need a parser and
compiler framework that allows plugins at every stage.  You "MUST" have a
rich and stable AST and it must be usable as a quasi-literal because
transpilers abound. You wind up with transpiler code that is templated and
quite "Lispy".

At the end of the day you will finally let in Macros. I believe thatJulia
got all this right. They stick a "@" in front of their macro invocations so
you get rid of a lot of confusion. David Moon made the Julia macro system a
thing of true beauty. Perfection actually.

At the end of the day you want Smalltalk Compile Time "Staged Meta
Evaluation".

Still, at a minimum go with the ES6 design. Consider "<|" because " ` " is
hard to see.  Some fonts do a terrible job with it.  You could do both. 




--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Re-vwnc-Does-anyone-have-a-new-string-literal-tp4667088p4936429.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list