| Language Design [message #589697] |
Sat, 31 October 2009 08:20 |
|
Hi,
I followed your interesting discussions about the design of a good
language for b3. It's obvious that Hendrik is a very lazy guy with
respect to using the keyboard. I have no doubt that he is smart enough
to be able to express the most complicated semantics with only a handful
of symbols. Here an example from previous posts:
a[ ~{ ~/^creat[0-9]+/g[status==true]:..:**}.forEach(function(x){
print x; });
a =X@; a[~{q}]. Is equivalent to X@[~{q}]
x:*:y:values@first = 10;
I'm sure that many of the smarter developers among us will be able to
read and write sentences like these after some RTFM. Those that are not
involved in building too often will certainly have to consult the
language documentation each time they try to understand these build
scripts. Please ask yourself if it's really unavoidable or desirable to
put the entry barrier that high.
It reminds me a little bit to my experience with regular expressions and
the SQL. Guess which of the two is immediately understandeable for
beginners. I understand that there are different expectations. Some
folks will want to write very little code to achieve a particlar task,
while others will prefer to have more code in favour of readability.
Personally I would appreciate if b3 could satisfy both worlds, perhaps
by providing redundant syntaxes for the different audiences.
Cheers
/Eike
----
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper
Cheers
/Eike
----
http://www.esc-net.de
http://thegordian.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/eikestepper
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03685 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
