Parrot: Why the clunky syntax?

Phil Hunt philh at vision25.demon.co.uk
Mon Aug 30 19:36:09 CEST 1999


In article <37C9FF53.DD466783 at compaq.com>
           greg.ewing at compaq.com "Greg Ewing" writes:
> Instead of a syntax like
> 
>   window @MyWindow "My First Window" {
>        menuBar {
>           menu "File" {
>              menuItem @New "New"
>           }
>   }
> 
> why not something more Python-inspired, e.g.
> 
>   window MyWindow("My First Window"):
>     menubar:
>       menu File:
>         menuitem New
>
> After all, we like Python because it does without
> line noise like @{} -- don't we?

That's a very good question.

Basically, the current syntax was chosen because I like it. I don't
think there would be much problem implementing a more Pythonesque
syntax -- probably just rewriting the lexical analyser so it
output INDENT and DEDENT symbols would do it. In any case, Parrot is
explicitly designed to be able to cope with multiple frontends and 
backends; perhaps one could be added.

-- 
Phil Hunt....philh at vision25.demon.co.uk





More information about the Python-list mailing list