On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Andrew Reilly <areilly_at_bigpond.net.au> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 11:15:55PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >> got any other suggestions? > > This is very much a "sorry I asked" question, but is none-the > less quite a good one, given the size of the hole to be plugged. > > I think that a reasonable answer for this sort of thing might be > one of the dynamic languages that compiles to C, like (perhaps) > one of the schemes (chicken, gambit-C, bigloo, etc). You get > the benefit of flexibility and dynamism with good regexp and > data structure ability, good performance, and only requiring the > build tools available in the base system, as long as you don't > want to be the developer: just ship the C code (as well as the > source, of course). > > Unfortunately it seems that quite a lot of people have issues > with lisp syntax these days. +1 for a scheme shell, but not for the heavy-weight variety that compiles to C, as that would tie them to a subset of ${ARCH}es. After all LISP-like syntax is *still* more common and prevalent than Lua, e.g. in Elisp, guile, esh, scsh and a lot of other apps that use it as a small language. So we can expect more users to be at least partially familiar with it. And there *are* lightweight MIT- or BSD-licensed scheme interpreters out there too: http://community.schemewiki.org/?scheme-faq-standards#implementations -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/Received on Thu Aug 19 2010 - 14:27:51 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:06 UTC