[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: An infix syntax for Scheme ...

From: Thomas Morley
Subject: Re: An infix syntax for Scheme ...
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 01:03:01 +0200

Am Di., 9. Aug. 2022 um 23:46 Uhr schrieb Jean Abou Samra <>:
> Hi,
> Some time ago, Jacques Menu asked on the French-speaking equivalent of
> this list if it would be possible to create an infix syntax for Scheme
> that would be more approachable for beginners.
> As we discussed this topic privately and he asked me questions about how
> a possible implementation could be done, I ended up finding that an
> example was easier to give than full explanations, and this gave
> "Herescheme":
> This is a Git repository. You can also download the code as a .zip archive
> using the "Download" button, or from this direct link:
> To use Herescheme, download that, unzip it, and \include the file
> "/.../herescheme/herescheme.ily". This requires a 2.23 version of
> LilyPond (tested with 2.23.11).
> There are a number of examples in the file
> Excerpt:
> \relative c' {
>    \shape &"[(0, 0), (0, 1.5), (0, 0.4), (0, 0)]" Slur
>    \override Beam.grow-direction =
>      &"function(beam) =>
>          let Y_positions = ly.grob_property(beam, |positions|) in
>          {
>            ly.message('Beam \\'positions are ~a', Y_positions);
>            let left_position = car(Y_positions) in
>            let right_position = cdr(Y_positions) in
>            if left_position < right_position then {
>              RIGHT
>            }
>            else if left_position > right_position then  {
>              LEFT
>            }
>            else if left_position = right_position then {
>              CENTER
>            }
>            else ly.error('this can\\'t happen')
>          }"
>    c'16( d e f g f e d c g c g c e g c)
> }
> This is experimental; comments on it are welcome, but I don't recommend
> using it for serious projects yet.
> To be honest, I have no idea if what I did here is actually a good idea
> at all (I for one won't use it). I'm just curious to see. On the one hand,
> normal Scheme syntax is used in all Scheme tutorials, in the Guile manuals,
> on mailing list snippets, and when printing values, so only using Herescheme
> syntax without knowing about basic Scheme syntax is likely tough. On the
> other hand, I know Scheme is off-putting to some people just because of its
> many parentheses and the "unintuitive" way of placing the operator as
> prefix.
> If that is your case, maybe you'll find Herescheme to your taste. Or maybe
> not.
> It is possible to mix Scheme and Herescheme code seamlessly.
> Also, please note that Herescheme is *not* a whole new language.
> Don't expect to be able to write something similar to Java or
> Python in LilyPond. Herescheme has the same underlying concepts
> as Scheme, is just a different syntax for writing Scheme code.
> It does have a syntax that is more familiar to people used to
> languages other than from the Lisp family.
> Finally, this was just a side project in passing for me, so by
> all means do comment, but please don't expect me to update the
> code fast.
> Regards,
> Jean

Do you know WISP by Arne Babenhauserheide

Tbh, I don't like these approaches, though WISP already exists. No
need to duplicate efforts, at least it's worth a closer look!?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]