• Am I writing PostScript wrong?

    From luser droog@21:1/5 to All on Thu Nov 25 18:46:32 2021
    (I asked a similar question in comp.lang.c wrt C)

    I've been really hooked on the parser combinator stuff for a while
    and I've implemented a dozen or so versions in PostScript. But having questioned whether I'm writing C wrong by turning it into Lisp,
    the question naturally follows: Is my PostScript code too Lisp-y?

    I'm regularly relying on my "pairs" and "func" extensions described
    here: https://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/193520/an-enhanced-syntax-for-defining-functions-in-postscript

    And along with these come `combine` and `curry`. So there's a whole
    lotta currying going on. But I also noticed that I may be needlessly
    creating extra Lisp-ish structures where they aren't needed or helpful.

    The big problems with my last round of test cases for the parsers was
    due to creating results as cons lists. When I just stopped doing that
    and did something more sensible from the PS point of view, the whole
    problem smoothed out and fizzled.

    But even now, I'm adding extra structure to wrap up the "reply" from
    each parser as a single object. PostScript doesn't naturally impose
    this restriction. You can just return multiple values by leaving
    multiple values. Invisible tuples, so to speak.

    So, I might try one more re-write to strip away the structure and
    return

    <result> <remainder> true
    <message> <remainder> false

    And that's almost the same as the `token` interface. So, it feels
    like the right direction.

    Is my lisp showing in other places?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)