You're correct. It seems to work using a template, which is a simple macro. I wonder if those are hygienic... In any case, it seems you could use the macro facility to instead have explicit bindings for match groups.
Re:Nimrod Programming Language
by halo on Wednesday May 13, 2009 @06:50PM
(#607858)
I think it takes bits and pieces from various languages.
Python's influence is obvious: iterators, whitespace, and default values for arguments. Pascal's main influence seems to be type declarations and the way things are named. C-esque enumerations, strings ending in null and pointers.
It does have lists/sequences, sets and tuples, but associative arrays/dictionaries seem like a major oversight.
Re:Nimrod Programming Language
by cnlwsu on Thursday May 14, 2009 @08:21AM
(#608601)
I was curious about
"Nimrod produces small executables without dependencies for easy redistribution."
does this mean that it packages any third party libs in the executable? wouldnt there be licensing issues?
You're correct. It seems to work using a template, which is a simple macro. I wonder if those are hygienic... In any case, it seems you could use the macro facility to instead have explicit bindings for match groups.
Python's influence is obvious: iterators, whitespace, and default values for arguments. Pascal's main influence seems to be type declarations and the way things are named. C-esque enumerations, strings ending in null and pointers.
It does have lists/sequences, sets and tuples, but associative arrays/dictionaries seem like a major oversight.
Seems like {perl|ruby|etc}-light.
I don't get it. The scripting languaguages in common use are quite similar; what distinguishes Nimrod?
Perl 5 has had source filters for a long time. It isn't unique, afaik.
Still neat, I guess.
Did you not bother to read it?
But if it is really fast, then I'd say it is like some spicy indian chicken and consider using it -- if there also is an interpreted version.