Re: Lisp syntax, was A simpler way to tokenize and parse?

Path	csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: Lisp syntax, was A simpler way to tokenize and parse?
Date	Sat, 25 Mar 2023 13:14:31 GMT
Organization	Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Sender	johnl@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<23-03-018@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<23-03-011@comp.compilers>
Injection-Info	gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="26817"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords	Lisp, lex
Posted-Date	25 Mar 2023 10:50:06 EDT
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref	csiph.com comp.compilers:3420

Show key headers only | View raw

>[[...] The original plan was that Lisp 2
>would have M expressions that looked more like a normal language but
>it's over 50 years later and they still haven't gotten around to it.
>-John]

Actually they have.  Some HOPL paper (or several of them) discuss
this: There were several attempts at an Algol-like syntax, but Lisp
proprammers found that they preferred programming in S-Expressions
over the Algol-like syntax, whether it's M-Expressions, Dylan syntax,
or several other attempts.

The only language which might be considered a success at having an
Algol-like syntax in something similar to Lisp is JavaScript.  Maybe
this is just because JavaScript is far enough from Lisp not just in
syntax, and there is no S-expression syntax for JavaScript, is there?

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Roger L Costello <costello@mitre.org> - 2023-03-24 14:45 +0000
  Re: Lisp syntax, was A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-03-25 11:55 +0000
    Re: Lisp syntax, was A simpler way to tokenize and parse? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2023-03-25 14:32 -0700
  Re: Lisp syntax, was A simpler way to tokenize and parse? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2023-03-25 13:14 +0000
    Re: Lisp syntax, was A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-03-26 00:46 +0000
  Re: A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Lieven Marchand <mal@wyrd.be> - 2023-03-25 19:58 +0100
    Re: A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-03-26 14:10 +0000
    Re: A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-03-26 18:19 +0000
      Re: Lisp syntax, A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Lieven Marchand <mal@wyrd.be> - 2023-03-27 23:15 +0200
  Re: A simpler way to tokenize and parse? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-03-26 01:17 +0000

csiph-web