From: Sean Middleditch <elanthis@...>
Date: 2001-08-25T04:33:51+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:20307] Backwards language

Greetings,

I'm developing a specialty language that is in some ways heavily inspired
by Ruby.

I'm wondering how people think of my idea.  I am developing, currently,
nothing but the back end.  I haven't the slightest clue what the actual
language will look like, even though the backend is already capable of
executing pretty simple code (generating byte code with a C API).  The idea
is that I am putting all of my effort into developing a very lean and fast
backend design solely for embedding into applications (mainly games).  The
result is a fairly powerful backend that is language independent.

Now, the backend isn't nearly as powerful as, say, Ruby's.  It's not as
flexible in its class design, since its purpose is less on a powerful
language than it is on a powerful and fast backend.

What I'm wondering is what people think of a "language" like this.  One
that can have a compiler that understand's a C-like syntax, a Ruby-like
syntax, LISP-like, whatever, but all runs on one backend, design not for
application-level power or flexibility, but merely an extremely simple
embedding API which a fast interpreter that gives the embedding app lots of
power.

Has anyone taken this approach before?  Had a decently functional backend
before they even started working on an interpreter/byte-code compiler?  How
was the Ruby development done?  Was the idea of the language syntax thought
up first, the idea of the language flexibility/features, or the backend
power?
If anyone is curious as to why I'm even bothering with this, it is because
no embeddable language I've encountered has met my expectation of being (a)
easy to embed, (b) fast, (c) easy on the script programmer.  Although, I
will admit, Ruby is the best I've seen to date, and it's what I'm currently
using as an embedded language.

Thanks for the great work on Ruby, guys, and any opinions you may send my
way!
Sean Etc.