[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: C# is not Dylan (was: Re: C# : The new language from M$)
-
To: info-dylan@ai.mit.edu
-
Subject: Re: C# is not Dylan (was: Re: C# : The new language from M$)
-
From: Bruce Hoult <bruce@hoult.org>
-
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:45:02 -0400 (EDT)
-
Organization: The Internet Group Ltd
-
References: <57D01C66CBEFE28E.0140FBE2F42B8951.48F3FDB0A810D9E0@lp.airnews.net> <m3zoo7w69a.fsf@cadet.dsl.speakeasy.net> <huvjls0t6hfio3htr0r1ee3bk57b0th1dr@4ax.com> <c29g0pxbubg.fsf@nerd-xing.mit.edu> <kpamlscdjl89ihfhsdk3d4rinoa1hji78j@4ax.com>
-
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.0 (PPC)
-
Xref: traf.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.lisp:53994 comp.lang.dylan:12271
In article <kpamlscdjl89ihfhsdk3d4rinoa1hji78j@4ax.com>, Jason Trenouth
<jason@harlequin.com> wrote:
> Well, Dylan really isn't C-ish syntax. No braces (except in macro
> definitions), no casting, postfix type declarations, and very
> different (Lisp/Scheme-like) identifier conventions. Unfortunately,
> from the point of view of promulgating the language, Dylan's syntax
> looks very alien to many C programmers.
I suspect that the guys tasked with coming up with the infix syntax were
concerned that if it looked *too* C-like then people would expect it to
have C semantics.
This was, of course, in the days before Java, Perl, and C#.
-- Bruce
Follow-Ups: