

New Programming Language, Lisp syntax, but ruby semantics - npk
http://programming.nu/

======
AF
I don't see the point in this as a serious production language. As a project
to just have fun, of course it is a cool idea.

Lisp systems moved to generic functions for a reason - Lisp dialects for some
time used a Smalltalk-based message sending model, but it just isn't as
flexible.

But if the desire is to get Ruby semantics with Lisp syntax, I think the much
more reasonable approach is to run a Rubyesque Lisp on Rubinius (which the
lead devs have already talked of doing). At least by doing that you get the
advantage of piggybacking on an advancing VM and a language that already has
libraries.

Establishing a new language is hard.

------
ralphc
Disclaimer: I haven't tried Nu yet, just read the FAQs. Nu isn't about Ruby
semantics, it's about Cocoa and Objective-C semantics. It's a Lispy/scripting
way of interacting with the Mac OS programming paradigm. The author is also
the author of the RubyObjc bridge, and Nu was a result of his frustrations
with the "impedance mismatch" between Ruby objects and code and Objective C.

------
jsmcgd
My first reaction is that I am surprised to see Lisp syntax with Ruby
semantics. I would have expected things to be the other way around.

~~~
jamongkad
Yeah like Ruby syntax with Lisp semantics. Now that would be a sight to behold
huh? although looking at it more closely it looks quite elegant. Worth a shot
to learn.

~~~
richcollins
Ruby has a fairly complex syntax. Why would you prefer it to Lisp's simple
syntax? The nice thing about Ruby is message passing and dynamic method
lookups, not its syntax.

------
Goladus
Slightly off topic, but there was an interesting example on one of the
documentation pages:

    
    
            % (set laws "Asimov defined #{(+ 1 1 1)} laws of Robotics")
            % (puts laws)
            Asimov defined 3 laws of Robotics
    

Are there any other standard ways to embed s-expressions in strings?

