Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.misc > #11685

Re: polyglot programming, Recent history of vi

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 09:11:52 +0100, Axel Reichert wrote:

> Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>
>> My feeling is, while both Forth and PostScript, as stack-based
>> languages, belong in a museum these days, PostScript still has some
>> interesting ideas worth resurrecting (homoiconicity, for one).
>> Forth does not.
>
> Are you aware of
>
>   https://factorcode.org/
>
> ?
>
> I found that very interesting, to the point of mind-bending.

At an initial look, it seems a bit more Forth-like than
PostScript-like. There is still that concept of “compile-time” versus
“run-time” interpretation of words, which is a distinction made in
Forth but not PostScript.

I see it has both lexical binding and continuations.

Here <https://bitbucket.org/ldo17/gxscript/> is my particular
experiment along these lines. This one is very definitely
PostScript-like.

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

Thread

Re: polyglot programming, Recent history of vi Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-16 00:02 +0000
  Re: polyglot programming, Recent history of vi rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-16 01:41 +0000
  Re: polyglot programming, Recent history of vi Axel Reichert <mail@axel-reichert.de> - 2025-12-16 09:11 +0100
    Re: polyglot programming, Recent history of vi Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-16 21:44 +0000
  Re: PostScript and its uses (Re: polyglot programming, Recent history of vi) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-18 00:40 +0000

csiph-web