[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn
- From: Alex Queiroz <asandroq@...>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:25:50 -0300
Hallo,
On 25/01/06, mnewberry <mnewberry@mirametrics.com> wrote:
> Good point about {}. I hadn't thought about it in great detail.
>
> But what's wrong with != and // ??
>
Let me try this: They're from another language. "Another" as in
"not the same". At this pace, people wil soon ask for switch
statements and braces instead of do/end. Oh, wait... Seriously people,
if you want interpreted C look at TCC[1]. Lua IS NOT C. Lua is not C
semantically and should not be syntactically. Some people have even
argued that not mimicking C harms Lua. What harms Lua is people
changing it to look more like C, which may fool their users into
thinking they're similar. Luas is as similar to C as C is to Haskell's
monads.
The syntatic differences even help me. I switch between Lua and C
several times a day, and I must switch the way I program as well.
Programming in Lua is very different of programming in C, and the
syntatic differences help me remember that.
[1] - http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/tcc/
--
-alex
http://www.ventonegro.org/
- References:
- Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Vijay Aswadhati
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Ben Sunshine-Hill
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Walter Cruz
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, LEGO
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Chris Marrin
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Alen Ladavac
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Chris Marrin
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, mnewberry
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, Ben Sunshine-Hill
- Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn, mnewberry