Re: Dynamic Language (grammar)

"David G. Koontz" <koontz@ariolimax.com>
10 Aug 2000 00:05:48 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Dynamic Language (grammar) pohanl@my-deja.com (2000-07-31)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) mcr@demon.co.uk (Martin Rodgers) (2000-08-04)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) jimbo@radiks.net (2000-08-04)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) mcr@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Martin Rodgers) (2000-08-05)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) mcr@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Martin Rodgers) (2000-08-05)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) mcr@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Martin Rodgers) (2000-08-10)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) koontz@ariolimax.com (David G. Koontz) (2000-08-10)
Re: Dynamic Language (grammar) mcr@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Martin Rodgers) (2000-08-14)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "David G. Koontz" <koontz@ariolimax.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 10 Aug 2000 00:05:48 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 00-07-094 00-08-008 00-08-035
Keywords: design

>> [As I noted in an earlier message, languages with extensible syntax were
>> in vogue 30 years ago. It's technically not hard, what's hard is to
>> find a practical use for it. -John]


PostScript?
[Postscript certainly lets you define new operators, but I don't ever
recall seeing new syntax. -John]


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.