That code is using the C-Script assembler prototyping macros. It will produce VP assembler output, but lets you work without worrying about registers while you're getting stuff going.

Have a read through the docs/ASSIGNMENT.md file to see how this all fits together.

See https://github.com/vygr/ChrysaLisp/blob/master/docs/VM.md

As someone who isn't familiar with this Lisp dialect / DSL, something that stands out to me is the (def-struct ...) ... (def-struct-end), (def-method ...) ... (def-func-end), (switch) ... (endswitch), and (vpif ...) ... (endif). The appeal of s-expressions is that their nested structure is supposed to delineate the abstract syntax tree of the program, with the opening and closing parentheses denoting the boundaries of a construct. IMO this language's syntax isn't faithful to the spirit of Lisp.

The (def-struct) stuff is part of the assembler ! Not the Lisp.

Same with (def-enum) etc.

I am going to have to write a document to clearly state where these boundaries between the Lisp, the C-Script and the VP layers. I realise it's not that obvious sometimes.

Chris

(def-func-end) and other ‘ends’ look pretty un-lispy to me. Helps readability, though.

https://github.com/vygr/ChrysaLisp/blob/master/apps/terminal... for example

Looks like imperative/sequential lisp to me. Got those parenthesis, quoting and some light-weight nesting.

Anything in particular that sticks out to? Lack of recursion?