[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: sugestion for Lout - token stack
From: |
Jeff Kingston |
Subject: |
Re: sugestion for Lout - token stack |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Mar 2002 08:31:58 +1100 |
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:01:22 +0100 (MET), Oliver Bandel wrote:
>
> What do you mean? My dictionary does not contain the word
> "retrofit(ted)".
>
Shoved in awkwardly later.
> Do you think about using a different language for implementation
> of the new system?
>
> Maybe Ocaml? => http://www.ocaml.org
I've designed my own language, it's quite similar to Ocaml. But I
want to be in control of the compiler, and I want generic functions,
which Ocaml didn't have last time I looked.
>
> Can you explain what you think about problems of Lout
> (and possibly other formatting systems) and what you
> want to do better?
I don't have time to do this in an email, so I've re-posted a paper
I wrote six years ago (how time flies) when I first started thinking
about replacing Lout. It's called "The future of document formatting"
and you can find it on my home page,
http://www.it.usyd.edu.au/~jeff
It does not define a new language, it just goes through the requirements.
> Will it include new ideas from other systems (what about
> ConTeXt?)?
What's ConTeXt?
Jeff