2 ms·

Meh, "defective" is a strong word. It really depends on what you want out of your language - if you want static code analysis or a macro system, then yes, it's

by andreyf 17y ago

Meh, "defective" is a strong word. It really depends on what you want out of your language - if you want static code analysis or a macro system, then yes, it's defective. If you're looking to write a language that people use to write scripts here and there, then it's just a question of taste.

tolmasky 17y ago
Yes, but for a more practical example, this is defective in that it cannot be syntax highlighted correctly.
- barrkel 17y ago
  And syntax highlighting normally only requires lexical analysis, not syntactic analysis.
  - alxv 17y ago
    Conversely, automatic indentation requires syntactic analysis.
    - barrkel 17y ago
      However, most pretty printers only perform lexical analysis.
- mst 17y ago
  Hacky perl can't be highlighted Sensibly written perl highlights just fine - and you really need to commit intentional pathology to break the modern vim/emacs/etc. highlighters. Personally I find syntax highlighters less helpful and more annoying than the wavy green line grammar check in word, but as a consultant I get to use editors with highlighting often enough and don't remember the last time I broke one ...