Related articles |
---|
[ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language albertodemichelis@hotmail.com (2003-09-09) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language visionary25@hotmail.com (Vis Mike) (2003-09-14) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language me@here.there.com (Peter Ashford) (2003-09-22) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language emonk@slingshot.co.nz (Corey Murtagh) (2003-09-22) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2003-09-23) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-09-23) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language vbdis@aol.com (2003-09-27) |
Re: [ANN] Squirrel yet another scripting language visionary25@hotmail.com (Vis Mike) (2003-09-27) |
From: | Peter Ashford <me@here.there.com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.games.development.programming.misc |
Date: | 22 Sep 2003 23:40:04 -0400 |
Organization: | Xtra |
References: | 03-09-048 03-09-053 |
Keywords: | design, interpreter |
Posted-Date: | 22 Sep 2003 23:40:03 EDT |
> Looks a bit like NewtonScript / JavaScript. I have to ask why you chose C
> style loops instead of something like:
>
> for i in 1..10 { } or something similar. C style loops are so cryptic.
If you think of how many C, C++ and Java programmers are out there,
you'll come to realise that quite a few people don't find them crypitc
at all.
Peter.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.