Re: OT programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 7:14 AM, David Christensen
<dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote:
> On 12/25/2011 06:17 PM, Joel Rees wrote:
>>
>> Did you say you'd looked at Ruby?
>
>
> I didn't say, but, yes, I have looked at Ruby. It seems to be purpose-built
> for web stuff, which would help me with the web apps I'm wanting, but I
> don't know how well it would work for everything else.
Yeah, it's well advertised for webbish stuff, but the guy who wrote it
did/does not intend to limit it to the web. It's worth a play or two
without rails, at least.
>> Well, lisp was mentioned.
>
>
> Which Debian Squeeze package do you recommend for "hello, world!" and STFW
> tutorials?
Not enough experience with it to make a recommendation, so I'll defer
to Teemu on that. (I already had SBCL loaded, and I'm loading
emacs-slime now to take a look.
>> Did you say you've messed around with yacc/lex and their derivatives?
>
> I've always thought of them as tools for building compilers.
>
ergo, special purpose languages.
They aren't as easy to use, for me, as Forth, but they should scale
better than (existing implementations of) Forth (unless you can figure
out what Chuck is doing with colorforth and ride that wave, but it
looks like a wild ride to me).
>> And there's also Forth, but you say you want support for familiar
>> paradigms, so that may not be such a good suggestion.
>
>
> Forth looks similar to LISP.
Sometimes I think of Forth as Lisp reversed, without the parentheses
and the mathematical rigor that parentheses allow.
Lacking those would contribute to the difficulty of getting Forth to
scale. (I keep thinking I need to dig deeper into lisp and its progeny
-- Scheme, etc..)
Joel Rees
Reply to: