Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programming language design?

Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Mon, 19 Mar 2012 08:00:18 -0700

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[21 earlier articles]
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin torbenm@diku.dk (2012-03-14)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin torbenm@diku.dk (2012-03-14)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB) (2012-03-15)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin federation2005@netzero.com (Rock Brentwood) (2012-03-17)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB) (2012-03-18)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2012-03-18)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin genew@ocis.net (Gene Wirchenko) (2012-03-19)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin eijkhout@tacc.utexas.edu (2012-03-19)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin torbenm@diku.dk (2012-03-21)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2012-03-22)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin jgk@panix.com (2012-03-23)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin johann@2ndquadrant.com (Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson) (2012-06-06)
Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programmin gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2012-06-06)
[20 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 08:00:18 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
References: 12-03-012 12-03-013 12-03-038
Keywords: design, syntax, comment

On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:51:31 +0100, torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Fgidius
Mogensen) wrote:


[snip]


>But intuitive syntax can also mean consistent, unambiguous and without
>arbitrary restrictions, which certainly does not apply to C-style
>syntax. In a way, APL syntax is very intuitive: Operators are single
>characters, so you dont have problems parsing things like a+++b, where
>it is not clear where one operator ends and the next begins, evaluation


          Greedy parsing. Fornm the longest token. That is
                    a ++ + b


>order is consistent and there are few special cases.


          IIRC, APL had some operators formed by use of backspace.


          APL's right-to-left expression evaluation is unusual.


[snip]


Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[All APL operators are single characters, but given the limitations of
Selectric typewriters and keyboards, they composed some of them by
overstriking. APL doesn't evaluate from right to left, it groups from
right to left, which is different. The evaluation order within an
expression is generally invisible to the programmer unless you do
squirelly things with embedded assignments. -John]


Post a followup to this message

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