 The Pragmatic Language
started 7/30/2003; 4:27:06 PM - last post 8/4/2003; 6:27:54 AM
|
|
Vladimir Ivanovic - The Pragmatic Language 
7/30/2003; 4:27:06 PM (reads: 716, responses: 6)
|
|
|
There's a new Slashdot topic "Designing And Building A New Pragmatic Language" on the Pragmatic Language. Discussion about the Pragmatic Language is on pragmatic_lang@yahoogroups.com (previous discussion list was pragprog@yahoogroups.com).
I've read the (very sparse) draft language spec posted to the Files area of the pragmatic_lang group, but I must be missing a lot of context because I can't make any sense of it.
|
|
Chris Rathman - Re: The Pragmatic Language
8/2/2003; 11:56:36 PM (reads: 697, responses: 0)
|
|
|
The /. discussion can be found Here.
I don't know if a simpler syntax just for the sake of being simpler is a goal that's worthy of the effort. What I want is a language that does something for me that I can't already do or at least can't do without going through major hassles. Subtle problems and annoyances in languages may drive one to distraction, but it's what can do with the language that matters.
|
|
Isaac Gouy - Re: The Pragmatic Language
8/3/2003; 2:06:03 PM (reads: 685, responses: 2)
|
|
draft language spec... I can't make any sense of it
I don't even understand the idea of it.
Looking at The Pragmatic Programmer / Resources gives me the idea that making the best use of existing languages could be "harnessing the power of basic tools". How does designing a new language (as opposed to a DSL) creep under the banner "Pragmatic Programming"?
|
|
Frank Atanassow - Re: The Pragmatic Language
8/4/2003; 4:24:25 AM (reads: 703, responses: 1)
|
|
|
How does designing a new language (as opposed to a DSL) creep under the banner "Pragmatic Programming"?
Presumably because "pragmatic programming" doesn't imply "pragmatic program design".
|
|
Ehud Lamm - Re: The Pragmatic Language
8/4/2003; 5:12:53 AM (reads: 733, responses: 0)
|
|
|
Presumably because "pragmatic programming" doesn't imply "pragmatic program design".
Surely you don't mean to imply that pragmatic program design never involves designing DSLs?
|
|
Frank Atanassow - Re: The Pragmatic Language
8/4/2003; 6:25:15 AM (reads: 661, responses: 1)
|
|
|
Surely you don't mean to imply that pragmatic program design never involves designing DSLs?
I don't see how that conclusion would follow from my remark; I didn't say anything about DSL's. Anyway, you are asking the wrong person: pragmatism is not one of my virtues. :)
|
|
Ehud Lamm - Re: The Pragmatic Language
8/4/2003; 6:27:54 AM (reads: 698, responses: 0)
|
|
|
No offence. I was just checking...
|
|
|
|