5 ms·

Being able to define a language tailored to your problems is a wonderful thing. Don't be afraid of it. Scheme and other Lisps macros to build new syntax on top

Being able to define a language tailored to your problems is a wonderful thing. Don't be afraid of it. Scheme and other Lisps macros to build new syntax on top of a small core language. Are you tired of typing (function() { ... })() and other such forms? If so, you will like macros.

smrtinsert 13y ago
unless I can import a macro like clojure then no thanks. javascript debugging is already a major nightmare since any object can be edited anywhere, i dont need macros multiplying that disaster.
- klibertp 13y ago
  Actually you could easily use macros to reduce this nightmare. And yes, I wish for sane module system in JS too - my ideal is Racket in this regard, especially after recent addition of nested submodules.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >javascript debugging is already a major nightmare since any object can be edited anywhere No it really cannot, except if it's exported there.
CCs 13y ago
Right. Look at the many wonderful and widely used applications or websites implemented in those heavy DSL systems! Here is the full list:
- kenko 13y ago
  This is a funny comment to read on Hacker News.
  - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
    He did say "wonderful" ;-)
- grncdr 13y ago
  In addition to HN (as noted by my sibling) Facebook has extended both PHP and JavaScript with their own DSL's and syntax. I'm sure there are many more, but a lazy comment deserves a lazy answer ;)
  - CCs 13y ago
    It is different. Using DSL to describe your domain (application) is normal. One application = one domain. Learning in addition 15 different DSLs for libraries and tools, just because it's cute, is not the way to go. Soon you will argue about the exact definition of monad instead of shipping code.
- michaelw 13y ago
  Let's look at DSLs that which they were DSLs. To be kind we'll limit ourselves to javascript. On the building side we have Grunt and the less popular but still useful Jake. Ember's property system is a DSL. Angular's DI syntax is a DSL and as much as I love Angular there's really nothing to like about the horrible mix of ([{ that one has to use here. Actually Ember and Angular and just about every meaningful javascript framework defines several small DSLs. Pencil Code is an excellent learn-to-program DSL built on Iced Coffeescript. Coffeescript's crazy syntax makes DSLs slightly more approachable than Javascript but only for a while. Express and most server frameworks define a DSL. Anytime you find yourself passing a non trivial config struct you're really playing with a DSL. This is by no means a complete list.
- davexunit 13y ago
  For a good example, look no further than SRFI-41[1] which defines a language for "streams", lazy lists that may have no end. SICP covers this topic as well. Macros are used to great effect in Lisp land. They can be used to great effect in JavaScript land, too. With great power comes great responsibility. Does anyone know Arc well enough to point out some macros used in HN's source? [1] http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-41/srfi-41.html http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-41/srfi-41.html

smrtinsert 13y ago

unless I can import a macro like clojure then no thanks. javascript debugging is already a major nightmare since any object can be edited anywhere, i dont need macros multiplying that disaster.

klibertp 13y ago
Actually you could easily use macros to reduce this nightmare. And yes, I wish for sane module system in JS too - my ideal is Racket in this regard, especially after recent addition of nested submodules.
coldtea 13y ago
>javascript debugging is already a major nightmare since any object can be edited anywhere No it really cannot, except if it's exported there.

CCs 13y ago

Right. Look at the many wonderful and widely used applications or websites implemented in those heavy DSL systems! Here is the full list:

kenko 13y ago
This is a funny comment to read on Hacker News.
- stefantalpalaru 13y ago
  He did say "wonderful" ;-)
grncdr 13y ago
In addition to HN (as noted by my sibling) Facebook has extended both PHP and JavaScript with their own DSL's and syntax. I'm sure there are many more, but a lazy comment deserves a lazy answer ;)
- CCs 13y ago
  It is different. Using DSL to describe your domain (application) is normal. One application = one domain. Learning in addition 15 different DSLs for libraries and tools, just because it's cute, is not the way to go. Soon you will argue about the exact definition of monad instead of shipping code.
michaelw 13y ago
Let's look at DSLs that which they were DSLs. To be kind we'll limit ourselves to javascript. On the building side we have Grunt and the less popular but still useful Jake. Ember's property system is a DSL. Angular's DI syntax is a DSL and as much as I love Angular there's really nothing to like about the horrible mix of ([{ that one has to use here. Actually Ember and Angular and just about every meaningful javascript framework defines several small DSLs. Pencil Code is an excellent learn-to-program DSL built on Iced Coffeescript. Coffeescript's crazy syntax makes DSLs slightly more approachable than Javascript but only for a while. Express and most server frameworks define a DSL. Anytime you find yourself passing a non trivial config struct you're really playing with a DSL. This is by no means a complete list.
davexunit 13y ago
For a good example, look no further than SRFI-41[1] which defines a language for "streams", lazy lists that may have no end. SICP covers this topic as well. Macros are used to great effect in Lisp land. They can be used to great effect in JavaScript land, too. With great power comes great responsibility. Does anyone know Arc well enough to point out some macros used in HN's source? [1] http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-41/srfi-41.html http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-41/srfi-41.html