Notices by smlckz (smlckz@fe.disroot.org)

@amszmidt Remove that ‘a’ and then it’s fine. There’s neither a Forth, nor a Lisp. Both language families, I suppose, have similar ideals, but executed in extremely different manner. I can not exactly recall who put it this way, but I’ll borrow a part of their words and sentiment in the following: Forths are Lisps with empathy towards the machine, and Lisps are Forths with respect towards the theory. This is why I think the families of languages are used in different domains and rarely interact with each other; like two independent civilizations (“ecosystems”) with little trade or travel between them.

@amszmidt @pancake @korreckj328 Yeah, you can also “trivially” do something similar in Forth with SOURCE and >IN, here’s quite a fitting example: https://forth-standard.org/standard/core/PARSE-NAME

You should understand that these are quite low-level mechanisms. What I’m imagining would need some sufficient “framework” or “infrastructure”, which would make it as easy as installing and tweaking editor themes or plugins. I wonder if there are people who are interested in making this possible; if so, who they are and how much progress was made.

@amszmidt @pancake @korreckj328 I wonder if we’ll get to see the day when syntax qua syntax could be treated in the same manner as coding style (spaces vs. tabs, camelCase vs. snake_case vs. kebab-case vs. …), allowing for multiple “views” (in the database sense) of the same code for different choices of syntax, when each developer can locally use their preferred syntax and coding style and seamlessly collaborate with each other.. Is this too fantastical? We can already see a pattern of convergence towards certain features in the “most popular” programming languages: destructuring assignment, pattern matching, Option and Result types and so on.. it should be possible, right?