Re: Re: source-to-source translators

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 09:00 -0400, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Yes ! I think this has to be an iterative process. In the end, I'd like
> to see a domain-specific language that operates mostly with declarations
> (constraint -> transformation), but before condensing the language I'm sure
> some conventional imperative steps are required. Therefor, I think that
> python is an ideal playground.

I think one of the more fruitful places to go look for ideas is the C++
template language.  I've grown very fond of the things it allows you to
express, even though the syntax is awkward and ugly.  I'd very much like
to see a new (statically typed, compiled, non-garbage collected, object-
oriented, allowing object instances on the stack) language that took the
ideas from there and built a cleaner, better designed language around
them.

In a sense, templates already do some fairly sophisticated source-
>source translation.  It's like having a refactoring editor built into
the language.

Of course, the C++ template language itself is not compiled, is garbaged
collected, and only has the vaguest notion of what the stack even
is.  :-)

Have fun (if at all possible),
-- 
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they
be properly armed.  -- Alexander Hamilton
-- Eric Hopper ([email protected]  http://www.omnifarious.org/~hopper) --

_______________________________________________
Synopsis-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fresco.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/synopsis-devel

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCsX1yjtsvlOwvazYRArG8AKC9v/qnQYhtH0kvyTgQANybjRW+2ACg0ETU
De91QcPEmXToP/GXspT0P8U=
=YRqu
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----