Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it

Subject: Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it
From: Jay Carlson &lt;nop@ ... &gt;
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 15:24:45 -0400

lua-l archive

On Apr 28, 2015 12:54 PM, "Andrew Starks" <andrew.starks@trms.com> wrote:

> [2] Related: All DSLs evolve into Turing-Complete Crap.
> I'm not sure what the pithy "All Languages evolve into..." equivalent
> would be...

All languages with macros expand until they get Common Lisp's LOOP, and then everybody feels vaguely guilty for using it.

Jay

Follow-Ups:
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, steve donovan

References:
- clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Konstantin Osipov
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Daniel Silverstone
- RE: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Thijs Schreijer
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Andrew Starks
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Coda Highland
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Javier Guerra Giraldez
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Coda Highland
- Re: clumsiness of pcall() syntax and how we deal with it, Andrew Starks