Re: algorithmic Lisp language (was: Re: How to make M-x TAB not work on (interactive) declaration?)

[Jean Louis]

* Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2023-01-09 19:28]:
> I have often thought one should have a minimal
> Lisp language instead of a maximalist one [we
> don't have to outlaw the maximalist ones] so
> that the minimal one would be accessible to
> anyone instantly, but then one would program not
> one zillion modules so it would be impossible to
> know where to start anyway, no, instead one
> would implement known algorithms in that minimal
> language - indeed, sounds pretty fun and easy,
> right? (E.g. Bubblesort [1] or whatever.)

> Then one would have a superstructure language
> not of programming code as we are used to it,
> but of a special notation, actually a new code,
> but denoting those algorithms and how they would
> link and combine ...

Sounds to me as Prolog.

>From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:

PROLOG \PRO"LOG\ (pr[=o]"l[o^]g), n. (Computers)
   A declarative higher-level programming language in which
   instructions are written not as explicit procedural
   data-manipulation commands, but as logical statements. The
   language has built-in resolution procedures for logical
   inference.
   [PJC]

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/