<![CDATA[Thinking on a new syntax for #Scheme.]]>Thinking on a new syntax for . Distinguishing feature: insignificant indentation! Because itโ€™s hard to edit in ed.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/topic/550ec375-c44d-4b1c-8fd9-98f0422dd846/thinking-on-a-new-syntax-for-scheme.RSS for NodeFri, 15 May 2026 06:09:21 GMTSun, 10 May 2026 21:19:16 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Thinking on a new syntax for #Scheme. on Mon, 11 May 2026 12:54:21 GMT]]>@kirtai @mdhughes @restorante @aartaka Smalltalk's control structures are pretty much all higher-order polymorphic functions. I mean, it's a functional language in OO-clothing, so I'd call it quite far from ALGOL.

My modern favorite Lisp-with-ALGOL syntax is Elixir, btw. And don't forget that LISP 2, which never happened, was slated to have ALGOL syntax so you're standing on the shoulders of giants if you do that ๐Ÿ™‚

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mstdn.ca/users/cdegroot/statuses/116556042191375799https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mstdn.ca/users/cdegroot/statuses/116556042191375799Mon, 11 May 2026 12:54:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Thinking on a new syntax for #Scheme. on Mon, 11 May 2026 12:01:53 GMT]]>@mdhughes @restorante @aartaka
I have to wonder how much Smalltalk got.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://tech.lgbt/users/kirtai/statuses/116555835852548356https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://tech.lgbt/users/kirtai/statuses/116555835852548356Mon, 11 May 2026 12:01:53 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Thinking on a new syntax for #Scheme. on Mon, 11 May 2026 04:58:37 GMT]]>@restorante @aartaka Pretty much, but most just took the control structures from ALGOL, not lexical scoping or function references. Scheme got all of it.

Like, C is a mix of ASM & ALGOL, & some FORTRAN-isms.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://appdot.net/users/mdhughes/statuses/116554171520439455https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://appdot.net/users/mdhughes/statuses/116554171520439455Mon, 11 May 2026 04:58:37 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Thinking on a new syntax for #Scheme. on Mon, 11 May 2026 04:53:30 GMT]]>@mdhughes

But, does that mean the majority of 'modern' programming languages are all descendant of ALGOL?

That is very interesting. I read some ALGOL code and I love them.

@aartaka

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.linux.pizza/users/restorante/statuses/116554151368670453https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.linux.pizza/users/restorante/statuses/116554151368670453Mon, 11 May 2026 04:53:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Thinking on a new syntax for #Scheme. on Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:19 GMT]]>@aartaka Since Scheme is in some respects a dialect of ALGOL, just replace all the parens with BEGIN/END, & any uppercased symbol has an implicit BEGIN.

DEFINE tf LAMBDA BEGIN test END
IF EQUAL? test END
DISPLAY "yes" END
DISPLAY "no" END
END END END

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://appdot.net/users/mdhughes/statuses/116552998527784993https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://appdot.net/users/mdhughes/statuses/116552998527784993Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:19 GMT