alex@LAGUNA.METAPHOR.COM (Bob Alexander) (04/06/91)
I read your language survey with great interest, since (1) I'm also currently in the process of surveying languages for a particular use, and (2) I'm an Icon fan, user, and implementor. Regarding (1), you've done a really nice job of researching the languages and sharing your findings -- my interest is piqued to further investigate a couple of new languages. Thanks. Regarding (2), I watched the icon-group traffic stimulated by your posting, and noticed a couple of area that might not have been covered. So here are my additions: > - Unix interface is quite primitive. > If you just want to use a command, you can use `callout', anything > more complicated requires building a personal interpreter (not as > difficult as it may sound) I'm not sure just what constitutes a good UNIX interface, but Icon has great access to "commands" via subshells. It has a system() function just like C, and has popen() access for both reading and writing via the "p" option of the Icon open() function. "callout" was really intended for adding C functions to Icon, not for access to UNIX "commands". (However, if what you intended by the term "commands" is UNIX system calls, I agree the built-in interface is weak, although some of that sort of work can be done through subshell commands). > + can define your own iterators > i.e. your own procedures for iterating through arbitrary structures. Merely the tip of the generator/goal-directed iceberg :-)! > The Icon Programmming Language > Ralph E. Griswold and Madge T. Griswold > Prentice Hall 1983 There's a second edition of the excellent "Icon Book" that is even bigger and better than the original: Griswold, Ralph E. and Madge T. Griswold. "The Icon Programming Language, Second Edition", Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 1990. -- Bob Alexander Metaphor Computer Systems (415) 961-3600 x751 alex@metaphor.com ====^=== Mountain View, CA ...{uunet}!{decwrl,apple}!metaphor!alex