4 ms·

Sounds like bitC: https://web.archive.org/web/20160529063027/https://www.bitc-lang.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20160529063027/https://www.bitc-... It was

• zelphirkalt 4y ago
  Or Schemetran: https://gitlab.com/codetk/schemetran https://gitlab.com/codetk/schemetran A lisp syntax for writing Fortran.
• buescher 4y ago
  I think bitC was significantly more than that but I never used it in anger. Years ago I came across another system, c-amplify, which was more literally a lisp syntax for C, intriguing but at the time wasn't able to get it to work. https://voodoo-slide.blogspot.com/2010/01/amplifying-c.html https://voodoo-slide.blogspot.com/2010/01/amplifying-c.html A whole lot of people, including commenters on the link above, don't really get the difference between something like that and a lisp-to-C compiler. I'm not sure where the cognitive gap lies.
• Hemospectrum 4y ago
  > It was basically a lisp syntax for C It was more like a proto-Rust. The Lisp-like syntax was a placeholder while the developers (plural) tried to solve language problems on a semantic level. Memory safety was their white whale. They never came up with a solution for that. The original author left because he had given up.