On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Rémi Forax <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 26/05/2010 17:48, Brian Hurt a écrit : > > In the same time, users don't want to understand parsers/grammar > limitations. > Users want things like optional semicolon like in Javascript or Groovy, > Generics Foo<> or XML literals: <foo/> and traditional less than: a < foo, > XPath query literals: document//node/* but also // to specify a comment, > HTTP literals and ?: expression, etc. > > Users also want to have tools that can manipulate the language, ports of the language to other environments, etc. Wanting to have your cake and eat it too is a classic problem of people who don't want to understand the trade-offs. And the question becomes, which do they want more? > So there is a tension between having a parseable by any tools syntax and > be able to have some nice constructions in the language. > Like I said, there's a trade off. Brian -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
