Talk:DALIS
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Esoteric?
Is this esoteric at all? It certainly doesn't look it. Taneb 14:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose that depends on your definition of esoteric... 131.111.27.50 15:33, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- It looks similar to BASIC to me. Is there something I'm missing about the language showing that it was "designed to experiment with weird ideas, to be hard to program in, or as a joke, rather than for practical use"? Those criteria are from our esoteric programming language page; they're not hard-and-fast rules, but they tend to be a good guideline. —ehird 15:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose it depends if the term 'experimental' only relates to syntax, or if it can also include the manner in which the code is executed...31.52.175.137 16:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but is that part of the language proper, or just a detail of the implementations that already happen to exist? That is, is there anything about the language that requires or is especially suited to such an implementation? Having said that, I can very well believe that there can be esoteric implementations of non-esoteric languages, but right now the article doesn't explain (to me, at least) what is esoteric about the implementation. —ehird 16:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- DALIS was specifically designed to appear run from a browser where in actual fact the interpreter is actually distributed across many remote machines. Part of the experiment is to see where this takes the language, e.g. what type of keywords will emerge to support the intentions of scaleability? It might not even make any sense and end up being total madness. So the syntax is not really part of the experiment, but will no doubt be influenced by the original intentions. I feel an update to the main DALIS page coming, so that all this can be explained...31.52.175.137 17:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but is that part of the language proper, or just a detail of the implementations that already happen to exist? That is, is there anything about the language that requires or is especially suited to such an implementation? Having said that, I can very well believe that there can be esoteric implementations of non-esoteric languages, but right now the article doesn't explain (to me, at least) what is esoteric about the implementation. —ehird 16:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose it depends if the term 'experimental' only relates to syntax, or if it can also include the manner in which the code is executed...31.52.175.137 16:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- It looks similar to BASIC to me. Is there something I'm missing about the language showing that it was "designed to experiment with weird ideas, to be hard to program in, or as a joke, rather than for practical use"? Those criteria are from our esoteric programming language page; they're not hard-and-fast rules, but they tend to be a good guideline. —ehird 15:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Command line
It says: "...but interpreters are also being developed for the .NET Micro Framework and the PC command line." The PC doesn't have a command line! That is a function of the operating system, not of the hardware or BIOS or instruction set or anything like that. --Zzo38 (talk) 22:08, 26 July 2013 (BST)