After Parrot, what next?
David C. Ullrich
ullrich at math.okstate.edu
Wed Apr 11 12:00:45 EDT 2001
On 10 Apr 2001 11:54:35 GMT, neelk at alum.mit.edu (Neelakantan
Krishnaswami) wrote:
>Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> wrote:
>> A bunch of us were discussing the new Parrot syntax (i.e things like
>> "left_angle_bracket_right_angle_bracket") today and came up with a great
>> idea for a new language syntax, which mixes the best ideas of Parrot and
>> XML. Instead of:
>[ snip ]
>> you'd do:
>>
>> <for>
>> <controlvariable>line</controlvariable>
>> <iteratorlist>getlines</iteratorlist>
>> <body>
>> <statement>
>> <print>line</print>
>> </statement>
>> </body>
>> </for>
>>
>> So, what'ya think?
>
>You're too late.
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xexpr
>
>Yes, I thought it was a joke at first too, but no joy. How can
>anyone possibly consider this a good idea? The mind boggles. :(
The fact that TeX already exists does not mean there's no need
for MathML, nor is MathML a replacement for TeX; they have
different uses in different domains.
>Neel
More information about the Python-list
mailing list