Re: My thoughts on C# and gaming.

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:31 PM, OvermindDL1 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hah!  I love this paragraph:
>
>>>>
> If all we have to do to parse these non-lisp domain specific languages
> is write a short read macro, maybe these non-lisp languages really are
> lisp, just in a clever disguise. If XML can be directly read in by the
> lisp reader, maybe XML, in a twisted sort of sense, is actually lisp.
> Similarly, read macros can be used to read regular expressions and SQL
> queries directly into lisp, so maybe these languages really are lisp
> too. This fuzzy distinction between code and data, lisp and non-lisp,
> is the source of many interesting philosophical issues that have
> perplexed lisp programmers since the very beginning.
> <<<
>
> That is *so* true, further proof that as any language evolves, they
> evolve to become LISP.  ;-)

C++ differs significantly from LISP but is similarly basic and
powerful in its own domain.

Any other language can indeed be viewed as a subset of either LISP or
C++; that is, its facilities could have been supplied in the form of
either a LISP or C++ library without losing anything in terms of
semantics and speed (at least in principle.)

Unfortunately, both LISP and C++ have a rather unfriendly syntax.
Plus, libraries are not a very efficient vehicle to push corporate
interests. :)

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode
_______________________________________________
Sweng-Gamedev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com