4 ms·

So, Chicken Scheme[0] with a borrow checker? [0] https://www.call-cc.org https://www.call-cc.org

bjoli 9y ago
But without dynamic typing and Cheney on the MTA and with a completely different way of managing memory. And not a scheme.
- jstewartmobile 9y ago
  Scheme is a lisp, and I'm pretty confident that two of the biggest selling points of lisp are dynamic typing and a strong distaste for (if not an outright prohibition of) mutation. Put it as a question because if you take those two things away, wouldn't it just be Rust with parenthesis?
  - steinuil 9y ago
    The selling point of lisp is macros, and macros alone. Different dialects will have different characteristics: Common Lisp is dynamically typed and usually makes heavy use of mutation, others like Lux are purely functional and statically typed. > wouldn't it just be Rust with parenthesis? That's pretty much what it is.
    - metaobject 9y ago
      > The selling point of lisp is macros, and macros alone. That's a fairly bold claim.
    - jstewartmobile 9y ago
      Yes, but will macros retain their power in a statically typed environment?
      - bjoli 9y ago
        They work OK in typed racket, but you will have to help the type checker a bit for the more complex macros. And they provide utility that the type system doesn't. The for style loops are extremely useful
      - NiceGuy_Ty 9y ago
        The only requirement to make macros work in a statically typed environment is to create a suitable type to represent the source code, and provide the operations to transform the said type. For instance, Rust has a macro system that's pretty nice to work with. https://danielkeep.github.io/tlborm/book/README.html https://danielkeep.github.io/tlborm/book/README.html
      - masukomi 9y ago
        They work pretty well in Crystal[1]. Some things are certainly a bit harder than they are in lisp/scheme but you can get a lot done with them. In crystal this is (in my experience) due to the lack of reflection support, and thus the ability to call dynamical looked up methods. Add that in and i'm pretty sure you'd remove >=90% of the current limitations, but even without that, you can get a lot done. [1]: https://crystal-lang.org/ https://crystal-lang.org/

But without dynamic typing and Cheney on the MTA and with a completely different way of managing memory. And not a scheme.

jstewartmobile 9y ago
Scheme is a lisp, and I'm pretty confident that two of the biggest selling points of lisp are dynamic typing and a strong distaste for (if not an outright prohibition of) mutation. Put it as a question because if you take those two things away, wouldn't it just be Rust with parenthesis?
- steinuil 9y ago
  The selling point of lisp is macros, and macros alone. Different dialects will have different characteristics: Common Lisp is dynamically typed and usually makes heavy use of mutation, others like Lux are purely functional and statically typed. > wouldn't it just be Rust with parenthesis? That's pretty much what it is.
  - metaobject 9y ago
    > The selling point of lisp is macros, and macros alone. That's a fairly bold claim.
  - jstewartmobile 9y ago
    Yes, but will macros retain their power in a statically typed environment?
    - bjoli 9y ago
      They work OK in typed racket, but you will have to help the type checker a bit for the more complex macros. And they provide utility that the type system doesn't. The for style loops are extremely useful
    - NiceGuy_Ty 9y ago
      The only requirement to make macros work in a statically typed environment is to create a suitable type to represent the source code, and provide the operations to transform the said type. For instance, Rust has a macro system that's pretty nice to work with. https://danielkeep.github.io/tlborm/book/README.html https://danielkeep.github.io/tlborm/book/README.html
    - masukomi 9y ago
      They work pretty well in Crystal[1]. Some things are certainly a bit harder than they are in lisp/scheme but you can get a lot done with them. In crystal this is (in my experience) due to the lack of reflection support, and thus the ability to call dynamical looked up methods. Add that in and i'm pretty sure you'd remove >=90% of the current limitations, but even without that, you can get a lot done. [1]: https://crystal-lang.org/ https://crystal-lang.org/