5 ms·
I did, but I didn't mean it in a negative way! The Racket one is definitely more towards the "practical" side than the C++ one (C++ is more constrained when it
by jacobparker 9y ago
I did, but I didn't mean it in a negative way!
The Racket one is definitely more towards the "practical" side than the C++ one (C++ is more constrained when it comes to how it can embed DSLs) but for me it falls into a similar bucket with the label "interesting and quirky DSLs that probably aren't practically useful but make me very happy". You may disagree regarding practicality and that's okay by me but please don't take offense. :)
- TeMPOraL 9y agoFolks over at JetBrains built a whole big tool to handle things like this[0], so there is some non-joke motivation. Still, it's nice that Racket can handle this perfectly well in plaintext. -- [0] - https://www.jetbrains.com/mps/ https://www.jetbrains.com/mps/