Re: [Q] (newbie here) Guile as an extention language.

[sen_ml at eccosys dot com]

in the tradition of straying from the main discussion... ;-)

From: Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb@wolfram.com>
Subject: Re: [Q] (newbie here) Guile as an extention language.
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 03:59:02 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10006270344190.14941-100000@scully.wolfram.com>

> 5) Very small and easy-to-learn syntax (however, special forms can drive
> you up a wall)

as a relative late-comer to lisp and scheme, it's puzzled me that
special forms and macros aren't "marked" in some way to distinguish
them from functions/procedures.  in scheme, there appears to be an
attempt to distinguish things that perform assignment by appending an
exclamation point to the end of the corresponding name.  i suppose
it's too late to go around trying to rename the existing special
forms...

however, it seems to me that editors that provide syntax highlighting
could reflect such a distinction by using different visual feedback
for each (e.g. different color, font, etc.).  some time in the last
few years, i suggested this be done for the interactive lisp mode in
emacs, but no one seemed to be interested in the idea and i wasn't up
to the task (i suppose what is and what isn't a special form may
depend on the flavor of lisp one may be using, but it seems possible
that something useful could be concocted).

does this idea not seem worth the effort?

will there be a guile mode?  i noticed that there is some mention of
someone working on one in an old message from the archives (Subject is
something like "Scheme is too complicated").