3 ms·

Cute, but from like 28 [1] it looks like there is no macro support, so this isn't a lisp but is rather a way to write a ruby expression in a ruby array. [1] ht

• fogus 15y ago
  If macros are needed for the definition of a lisp, then you'll eliminate some important Lisps.[1] If you want macros in the one at the link (ulithp), then you only need to write that feature into an evaluator (dare I say, meta-circular) written in ulithp much like what is done in my other Lisp Lithp.[2] [1]: http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/recursive.html http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/recursive.html [2]: https://github.com/fogus/lithp/blob/master/src/core.lisp#L107 https://github.com/fogus/lithp/blob/master/src/core.lisp#L10...
  • eschulte 15y ago
    Link [2] looks very nice and IMO would be a much more interesting topic than the trivial ruby implementation. I apologize for the dismissive rudeness of my first comment... I am tired of the many "I saved a function and its arguments into a list, and then wrote a method to evaluate that list" implementations which seem to be so exciting. Although I guess this isn't a new trend (see lisp in awk [1]). [1] http://chasen.org/~daiti-m/etc/awk/walk.pdf http://chasen.org/~daiti-m/etc/awk/walk.pdf