Timeline for Reviewing language design, with working interpreter and test case?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 17, 2019 at 16:16 | comment | added | D. Ben Knoble | You might check out codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/224306/… of my own posting, which is about a DSL I programmed, and includes its spec, but the review is on the implementation, following the A. below. | |
| Jul 16, 2019 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCodeReview/status/1151235171183710209 | ||
| Jul 13, 2019 at 12:49 | answer | added | PeilonrayzMod | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 12, 2019 at 11:50 | comment | added | Mast Mod | It may not be much trouble, but it's important such a thing is written before the language-implementation can be reviewed. | |
| Jul 12, 2019 at 10:18 | comment | added | user11536834 | @Mast I'd write one up as part of the question. It's a very minimal language; think Thue, but with tuples (words separated by spaces) instead of strings, multipart rules allowing "wildcard" free variables, and simple top-down rule precedence, and you're probably 90% of the way there. I think a spec wouldn't be much trouble to write or digest. | |
| Jul 12, 2019 at 9:41 | comment | added | Mast Mod | Does the language have a clear specification? | |
| Jul 12, 2019 at 9:17 | history | asked | user11536834 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |