On Dec 5, 2007, at 4:14 PM, Waldemar Kornewald wrote:
Hi,
On Nov 28, 2007 12:10 AM, Ian Piumarta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
? attract many mainstream programmers
No. Conducive to creating systems/languages (standard or otherwise)
that will attract the mainstream: YES!
I think this is where I have the biggest problems understanding what
you're trying to achieve.
Is it correct that we'll have a Lisp-like syntax at the lowest level
and a Smalltalk-like syntax above (with some syntax sugar like in
eToys?)?
(Leaving aside whether eToys should be considered syntactic sugar on
top of Smalltalk, any more than C is syntactic sugar on assembler...)
Why not just pick Lisp syntax for the foundation and then build a
popular
syntax on top of that?
A JavaScript parser has already been implemented, and an intention to
support C has been declared. Are those popular enough?
As I understand it, one of the big goals of the project is that a
Smalltalk-like object can trivially send messages to objects generated-
by/coded-in JavaScript. You can use any language that you want, yet
still have perfectly convenient access to libraries written in other,
more popular, languages.
Josh
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
