4 ms·
My problem with Pollen is ... Racket. Racket is much more powerful than my tiny homemade lambdatalk but Racket is dedicated to coding in a console and not to wr
by martyalain 4y ago
My problem with Pollen is ... Racket. Racket is much more powerful than my tiny homemade lambdatalk but Racket is dedicated to coding in a console and not to write in a text editor. I wanted to be able to write text as in any text editor (without quoting words, strings, ...) and I had to implement an inversed evaluator to do so, skipping words unevaluated and evaluating only expressions. In fact lambdatalk is nothing but an extended HTML in lisp clothes. The engine is essentially built on a single regexp, not on parser working on an AST.
- martyalain 4y agoedit: have a look to the origin of the lambdatalk's evaluator: http://lambdaway.free.fr/lambdawalks/?view=levithan http://lambdaway.free.fr/lambdawalks/?view=levithan , a single JS line using a single regular expression (regexp) to evaluate nested s-expressions from inside out. I just had to add 9 special forms [lambda, def, if, let, quote, macro, style, script, require] to extend it towards a programming language. I did not know that regular expressions were a bad choice to build an evaluator, so I tried them.
- soegaard 4y ago> ... but Racket is dedicated to coding in a console and not to write in a text editor. I am a bit surprised about this comment. Have you tried `racket-mode` in Emacs? https://racket-mode.com/ https://racket-mode.com/