On 7/18/2010 1:46 AM, joel falcou wrote:
> OvermindDL1 wrote:
>> Proto already feels a lot like LISP, no doubt there is a lot to pull
>> from it.  I have not made any Proto-based DSEL's yet, but no doubt I
>> could have a lot of input based on my LISP experience once I do..
> 
> It really does. Most of our proto DSL start their life as a ML or
> Haskell programm then get turned into C++ when the semantic actions have
> been verified thanks to the ML type checker.
> 
> I'll soon commit the proto core of NT2 in our github account. I'll link
> it there so you may have a look at how such stuff can be structured.

I don't actually know Lisp or Haskell very well, so any similarity proto
bears to them was the result of either subliminal stimuli or convergent
evolution. I want to know in what ways you guys think they're similar.
I'm very interested! Joel, why write it in ML first?

Overmind, thanks for sharing the Lisp link. Very simple really, and
reminds me a lot of the vision I have for Phoenix3 (e.g., passing
unevaluated C++ "s-expressions" to functions for evaluation or
transformation).

-- 
Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com
_______________________________________________
proto mailing list
proto@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/proto

Reply via email to