Re: implementation languages, was Supporting multiple input syntaxes

On Sunday, August 23, 2020 at 10:15:06 PM UTC-5, luser droog wrote:


> Thanks to everyone for the help, esp. Kaz with the brilliant suggestion
> to pass a language id token between tokenizer and parser.
>
>
> Ps. the prototype is written in PostScript extended with function syntax.
> https://github.com/luser-dr00g/pcomb/blob/master/ps/pc11.ps
> https://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/193520/an-enhanced-syntax-for-defining-functions-in-postscript
>
> --
> l droog
> [Why Postscript? I realize it's Turing complete, but it seems odd to run ones parser on a printer. -John]


I discovered PostScript around '97 or '98. I was taking Computer Graphics
and it was in an Appendix to the textbook (Salman). At the same time
I was editor of the Honors College student magazine so it really piqued
my interest as a graphics and typography language.


But the language itself I just really enjoy. It's my "Lego blocks"
language. The RPN syntax removes all ambiguity about precedence and
sequencing. It has the same code=data properties as Lisp. Application
code can read from the program stream. It has strings, arrays and
dictionaries. It has first class procedures which can be constructed
on the fly. I've found it a nice playpen for syntax extension.


I was also on a many-decades long crusade to never use MS Word after that
/first/ time they screwed everyone by changing the interface. And
PostScript has slowly become my tool for that as my programming skill grew.
https://github.com/luser-dr00g/ibis.ps


On another front, I wanted to have parsers in PostScript so I could
evaluate infix math expressions. And I wanted regular expression
matching in PS thinking it would help to implement algorithmic
hyphenation of text.
[Take a look at Forth. Many of the same advantages, runs a lot more places. -John]

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