4 ms·
The question is, as always, at what cost? Low-level languages (aka "systems programming" languages) already suffer from various constraints that increase their
by pron 7y ago
The question is, as always, at what cost?
Low-level languages (aka "systems programming" languages) already suffer from various constraints that increase their accidental complexity. Is it really necessary to complicate those particular languages further to support embedded DSLs?
I don't think there's a universal right or wrong answer here, but there is certainly a big question.
- gw 7y agoIronically, the lack of macros leads to an explosion of ad-hoc, extra-language DSLs. Look at rules engines, for example. In Drools (java), you have to write rules with a special language, DRL. Meanwhile in Clara (clojure) you write your rules in clojure. Macros simplify languages, they don't complicate them.