From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dd4586b9dd51c602
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: general-purpose vs. domain-specific programming languages
Date: 1998/01/07
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980107183712.5233B-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 313816580
References: <98010512040396@psavax.pwfl.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Trace: 884227676 12297 bpr  206.184.139.132
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-01-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96 wrote:
> ... snip ...
>
>     I don't know Perl, so I can't speak to specific features. It would
>     seem that even in a 'string friendly' language like Perl, you'd
>     still need to specify certain things like the source file, the
>     object file, the string (or meta-string?) to search for and the
>     string with which to replace it. In Ada, you might build a package
>     like this:
>
> ... snip ... 

I think that an interesting approach might be to embed an entire family 
of different domain specific languages as a set of Ada packages
implementing interpreters for these languages. I was working on something
like that for a while, based on Kamin's interpreters, but lost a lot of
free time when I changed jobs. Kamin's book (whose title escapes me) has 
a bunch of interpreters for Scheme, APL, Prolog, and others, all with a
Lispish surface syntax. 

-- Brian