3 ms·
This is interesting to me. It feels like you just moved the problem though. Now you have to remember HTML and your mapping from elisp to HTML. If you really li
by tonetheman 5y ago
This is interesting to me. It feels like you just moved the problem though. Now you have to remember HTML and your mapping from elisp to HTML.
If you really like elisp maybe that is not a bad trade off.
- rurusnapsnap 5y agoIsn't the mapping 1-1? Lisp is pretty much what you'd get after parsing HTML; Elisp shown in the post isn't even code (as in it don't really execute). It is just text which is native to ELisp, hence is much easier to manipulate. I like it, because this is essentially removing a layer of abstraction. What would otherwise be 'code -> templating-engine -> html', is now 'code -> html'. Saying it out loud, it is sort of beautiful :) May be I should dust-off my ol' Emacs again.
- tonetheman 5y agoReading your description is pretty cool. I too will look at emacs again.
- fiddlerwoaroof 5y agoHiccup[1] in Clojure and spinneret[2] in Common Lisp are implementations of a similar idea. [1]: https://practical.li/clojurescript/hiccup-style-syntax.html https://practical.li/clojurescript/hiccup-style-syntax.html [2]: https://github.com/ruricolist/spinneret https://github.com/ruricolist/spinneret