I had a phone call from Peri Hankey, urging me to look at his programming language, called languagemachine. It looks rather idiosyncratic to me, and doesn't seem to have much bearing on Links.
I suppose the relevance is really that, like Links, the language machine is analytic, which - for me at least - makes it really interesting.
Moreover it's just a little bit `dirty' in a way that is good in that it allows you to inline imperative programming logic inside the rules, and generally get at its innards.
This means that unlike a `pure' or `clean' notation, it's more hackable since There is More Than One Way To Do It (TM) - which gives you expressive power and flexibility.
I think Peri's work is definitely worth taking a look at if you're programming in D or are tired of hand coding several thousand line lexers and parsers.
d'oh, I've just realised the source of the confusion (mine certainly) - `Link grammar' is an analytic grammar theory (as opposed to a generative grammar) which does of course have no bearing on `Links' and AJAX framework...
Idiosyncratic to whom?
ReplyDeleteI suppose the relevance is really that, like Links, the language machine is analytic, which - for me at least - makes it really interesting.
Moreover it's just a little bit `dirty' in a way that is good in that it allows you to inline imperative programming logic inside the rules, and generally get at its innards.
This means that unlike a `pure' or `clean' notation, it's more hackable since There is More Than One Way To Do It (TM) - which gives you expressive power and flexibility.
I think Peri's work is definitely worth taking a look at if you're programming in D or are tired of hand coding several thousand line lexers and parsers.
d'oh, I've just realised the source of the confusion (mine certainly) - `Link grammar' is an analytic grammar theory (as opposed to a generative grammar) which does of course have no bearing on `Links' and AJAX framework...
ReplyDelete