[chuck-users] [livecode] Call for proposals: CMJ live coding videos
haberg-1 at telia.com
Sun Dec 5 13:46:01 EST 2010
On 5 Dec 2010, at 19:24, Kassen wrote:
>> No, I am making my own language right now using Bison/Flex, but its
>> syntax is what is expected as standard. For example, (x, y) |-> x +
>> y evaluates to (lambda (x y) (+ x y)). But is possible to have more
>> complicated things, like functionals with variable arguments:
>> (x, y, ...) (z, ...) |-> [x, y, z]
>> --> (lambda (x . y) (lambda z (list x y z)))
>> Or calling functions:
>> f(a, b)(c, d)
>> --> ((f a b) c d)
> Got it. Seems like you are aiming for something with Scheme's
> "purity" (for lack of a better word) and yet with ChucK's "read left
> to right, like a novel" style instead of "read inside to outside,
> which will come down to right to left, most of the time, unless we
> need multiple lines in which case you better have a good editor". If
> so; that should be good.
I have my own ideas of what the syntax should be, but got started
using Guile as a back-end, which turns out to simplify the
implementation a great deal. (Guile 2.0 will have byte-code
compilation and switches to the Boehm conservative GC.)
I am using C, C++ and Guile can be called directly from those. So one
should be able to incorporate ChucK by calling its functions.
>> I have just started, but it moves fast forward.
> Send me a note when you have a twitter or RSS feed or similar for
Sure, whenever you want.
More information about the chuck-users