Re: What would your ideal language be like...

[Daniel Weinreb <address@hidden>]

Sundar Narasimhan wrote:

>Dan you misunderstood the point. And the way you chose to respond to
>it w/ Lisp further illustrates it -- what if I did not have the
>ability to rebind / control :input and :output for the context of my
>program written in language X, without understanding the syntax and
>semantics of "another" language Y? (JCL, sh, J2EE XML are all
>"different" languages :)  
>
Well, a lot of people think the fact that they are different langauges 
is a GOOD thing,
because the people who are doing the "deploying" are not people versed 
in programming
in the procedural programming language.

(This could get us into the great discussion that happened at Symbolics 
about having a
command processor: should it be a different langauge or the same 
language?  We managed
to get the best of both worlds to a great degree, but the only point I 
want to make here was
that a lot of us really did think that there was a reason to have a 
command processor
at all rather than just have everybody do everything from the 
read-eval-print loop.)