Sujet : Re: Why Python When There Is Perl?
De : ldo (at) *nospam* nz.invalid (Lawrence D'Oliveiro)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 23. Mar 2024, 04:28:09
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <utlenp$3993q$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
User-Agent : Pan/0.155 (Kherson; fc5a80b8)
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 08:38:35 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:45:13 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
The Cakewalk Application Language (CAL) was very
Lispy.
>
Was it like Autolisp, in making you suffer the Lisp syntax without the
cool stuff like AST-based macros and lexical binding? In short, the worst
of both worlds?
Dunno. I suspect Greg Hendershott used basic Lisp syntax because it was easy to
code.
I found some old docs
<https://web.archive.org/web/20070203202120/
http://home.wanadoo.nl/t.valkenburgh/indexmidi.html>.
If that is a complete description, then the language is extremely
limited: All variables must be global; no inner scopes, no function
definitions (just a fixed set of built-in functions. And most
certainly, no macros.