Re: Thoughts on the simplification of CLISP
Blake McBride <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.clisp.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABwHSOso8HxLesOx6hbRH5rYzWeZrh_0KB3osTq2K+eGNJsFTg@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Sam Steingold <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What exactly is the problem with the .d files? > > They scare and confuse a newcomer. > Exactly. Regardless of what I *can* do, I, like most, have limited time to work on non-work/fun stuff. The .d file syntax represents a barrier to entry, if you will. > > Compare them with the C files in Emacs. > > They also have crazy DEFUN and DEFVAR macros (CLISP has LISPFUN* in core > and DEFUN in modules), but the simple fact that they are called *.c and > do not use gratuitous syntax alterations like "#" comments and "var" > prefixes makes them much more palatable. > > I bet that if we rename *.d to *.c and remove varbrace and comment5 > preprocessors, the whole conversation will go away. > Yes, indeed. > > ... > > > CLISP is not the only project that puts the preprocessor to fancy uses. > > Yes, but CLISP is the only project which does gratuitous syntax > modifications. > Yes, and that's the problem. > ..... > > I think we need to drop the gratuitous preprocessors (varbrace & > comment5) and rename all files to *.c. > We need to preprocess them into *.m.c behind the scenes. > lisbpbibl.d should be lisbpbibl.h and not preprocessed. > &c. > Making it look like straight C would help a lot, IMO. Thank you. Blake McBride ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ clisp-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clisp-devel