On 3/3/08, Tim Daly wrote: > > Funny how we read the same article differently. >
Indeed! > ... > Thus, the specification reads something like: > > a := f(x,y,x) > > and my "domain specific language" that the specification > author writes is: > > (assign a (f x y x)) > Why do you call this a "domain specific language"? Suppose you were the editor of a scientific journal and you wanted to be able to allow people who only wrote in French to contribute to your journal. How happy would you make them if you told them that they could use their own language - provided - that the syntax and grammar was the same as English? > I COULD have written it as "strings" that read exactly like > the original syntax but I gained several advantages by using > lisp-like syntax. What you wrote is not just lisp-like, it *is* Lisp. > > The first is that my "parser" for this "language" is (read). Perhaps that is a clue that what you are actually doing is writing in Lisp? ;) > It took me milliseconds to implement the parser and it > is fully debugged. > No. You are simply writing in Lisp. Regards, Bill Page. _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
