4 ms·
I would argue for a Lisp. If you’re asking the user to use a language they’re not familiar with, it might as well be one that will expand their horizons, despit
by snazz 7y ago
I would argue for a Lisp. If you’re asking the user to use a language they’re not familiar with, it might as well be one that will expand their horizons, despite the potentially offputting syntax. It would be really cool if you added a key that switched from s-expressions to Sweet expressions[0] (and vice-versa). Forth is painful to use for anything more than a toy and no matter what language you choose it would be awesome to see a live-updating (graphical?) REPL.
[0] https://readable.sourceforge.io https://readable.sourceforge.io
- mntmoss 7y agoExpanding PL horizons is not a goal for this project. The goal for this specific usercode layer(of which there are four: WASM bytecode, the I/O memory map, the lower level operating system language, and the higher level interpreted language) is to achieve a mix of sustainability and familiarity. A language defined by a book explaining its implementation, while also being in the "looks-like-an-Algol" ballpark, falls very close to that mark. If you want a Lisp, it's possible, just rewrite the OS layer.