[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Some inquiries about Dylan tutorials and documentation
In article <ey3ya7af52a.fsf@cley.com>, Tim Bradshaw <tfb@cley.com> wrote:
> * Neel Krishnaswami wrote:
>
> > Using an explicit table of expansions is IMO better style, since
> > changing the variable names shouldn't affect the output of the
> > program. Plus when your template language grows into a full
> > programming language (and this always happens -- witness PHP), you'll
> > be in a better position to write an interpreter with comprehensible
> > behavior. :)
>
> Of course the argument that Perl (and Lisp) people would make is that
> when the template language grows you'll use the interpreter with
> comprehensible behaviour that you already have to hand, thanks to EVAL.
> Of course the perl people are wrong about the `comprehensible
> behaviour' bit...
heh.
I don't see any reason to *need* an interpreted language for this sort of
thing. Sure, it's often more convenient to embed bits of code in an html
document than to embed bits of html in a program, but all tat means is
that you should use some sort of pre-processor tool that can extract those
bits of code and make a pogram from them and compile it.
-- Bruce
Follow-Ups:
References: