2016-07-29 15:32 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]>: > > > On 29 Jul 2016, at 14:23, Thierry Goubier <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Sven, > > > > I'd put RB + SmaCC among the lot. But I consider that really non-trivial > : the pattern language of RB (and the underlying pattern matching and > unification algorithm) is top notch, and how SmaCC builds on RB to > virtually generate code / optimise code / then compile is nothing short of > amazing. > > > > SmaCC comes with a pattern matching/unification algorithm over ASTs + > auto-generation of AST code + visitor + tree equality + the equivalent of > Flex/Bison(*) + a GUI in 11401 lines of code. > > Well, you don't need to convince me that there is some really magic code > out there, thanks for pointing this out. People should really do more > effort to promote the stuff they like, by writing some nice accessible > article about it. (Hint, hint). >
Understood :) > The problem is that even though Smalltalk itself is simple, the whole > environment, being super dynamic/flexible, is not. It scares a lot of > people that they cannot really grab and hold the code. It is only once you > get beyond that initial hurdle (which also requires you to unlearn/learn a > new approach), that you can start to explore and appreciate all the good > stuff. I am still not sure how we can make this clear to newcomers, but it > feels like a critical step. > Maybe there is a question of coding style coupled with the tools? Thierry > > > Thierry > > > > (*) And a true equivalent, with LR, LALR and GLR ! > > > > 2016-07-29 14:05 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]>: > > <Social Media Marketing> > > > > The following interesting question/thread could use some more > comments/votes: > > > > Ask HN: Examples of elegant, non-trivial Smalltalk? | Hacker News > > > > > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12185892 < > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12185892> > > > > Sven > > > > >
