Adding Common Lisp to Ruby

[NF BetaK]

I forward an email conversation that I had with matz:
-Dear Yukihiro=2C
I find Ruby to be an incredible language=2C and I thank you for creating it=

 

[Robert Klemme]

|Yukihiro,|Do you agree that a set of problems is best solved with Ruby, =

and another one is better solved with Common Lisp? Let's take out the perfo=
rmance-related part, and parallel programming with it.

I do agree that some problems can be solved well using Ruby, and otherpro=

blems can be solved well with CommonLisp. IN THEORY, if you cancombine the =
two languages together WELL, you can solve broader domainof problems with o=
ne language. But if you fail to combine well, youwould kill the future of t=
he language. So without the image of goodcombination, it is no use discussi=
ng vague imaginary language.

I don't think simply adding defmacro makes Ruby any better.
matz.
/
Yukihiro,

In terms of real-world needs, and theoretical perfection, I would like to=

ask the Ruby community, what do you think of this?

Sincerely,Marco

I am 100% in line with what Matz says in his quote above. Present a
concrete suggestion how such a combination can look like - then we can
discuss on those grounds. This concept has to be developed anyway if
what you are suggesting should ever come true so the effort is not
wasted.

Kind regards

robert

--=20
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/

 

[Caleb Clausen]

I forward an email conversation that I had with matz:

[snip]


I created RubyMacros, an extension to ruby which adds lisp-style
macros (and forms). see http://github.com/coatl/rubymacros or 'gem
install rubymacros'. It can use some refinements, but it's basically
as powerful as lisp macros as is.

I don't understand Matz' objection to macros. He seems to be saying,
"Macros would let you create DSLs, and to understand code using them,
you'd have to understand the DSL as well." But people are already
creating DSLs with ruby, so this problem largely already exists.
Macros just enable better DSLs. Indeed, the capacity to, in effect,
extend the syntax of the base language is one of the biggest selling
features of macros.

Robert, Matz, concrete criticisms of the macro system I have created
are welcome.

 

[Louis-Philippe]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

that phrase from marco is funny:
"If I were that programmer, I would be very angry if I missed the
opportunity to learn or use such a language."

so marco, what are you if you're not a programmer? a Lisp evangelist?

aside of this... Ruby already owns most of what can make a programming
language awesome... and I hope it's not the end of its evolution yet!
In my opinion, if you give Ruby some macros, no other language will come
close to its power... its ego will over inflate, will get corrupted by its
dark side, fall into hard drugs and start polluting everyone's space...
what do you say?

I forward an email conversation that I had with matz:

[snip]


I created RubyMacros, an extension to ruby which adds lisp-style
macros (and forms). see http://github.com/coatl/rubymacros or 'gem
install rubymacros'. It can use some refinements, but it's basically
as powerful as lisp macros as is.

I don't understand Matz' objection to macros. He seems to be saying,
"Macros would let you create DSLs, and to understand code using them,
you'd have to understand the DSL as well." But people are already
creating DSLs with ruby, so this problem largely already exists.
Macros just enable better DSLs. Indeed, the capacity to, in effect,
extend the syntax of the base language is one of the biggest selling
features of macros.

Robert, Matz, concrete criticisms of the macro system I have created
are welcome.

 

[Paul Harrington]

that phrase from marco is funny:
"If I were that programmer, I would be very angry if I missed the
opportunity to learn or use such a language."

so marco, what are you if you're not a programmer? a Lisp evangelist?

OT, but
"If I were *that* programmer" is very different than "If I were *a*
programmer".


Don't really have anything to add to this though, as I've never really
desired macros in Ruby myself (don't do alot of meta-programming in
general).