←back to thread

Show HN: Term-Lisp – A Lisp, based on pattern matching and term rewriting

(github.com)
56 points boris_m | 1 comments | 06 Nov 24 14:53 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
BoiledCabbage ◴[06 Nov 24 18:07 UTC] No.42066515[source]▶
Term re-writing systems are a really interesting way of looking at computation.

It completely abstracts away the concept of a machine, and it's simply translation as computation - but equally as powerful.

replies(3): >>42066655 #>>42066678 #>>42067446 #
llm_trw ◴[06 Nov 24 18:17 UTC] No.42066678[source]▶
It's a shame the standard texts are all 20 years old or more than way too heavy mathematically.

A little book for term rewriting would be a great new addition.

replies(1): >>42067199 #
entaloneralie ◴[06 Nov 24 18:45 UTC] No.42067199[source]▶
Here's a little zine on multiset rewriting(unordered term rewriting), John Conway said(about Fractran in The Book of Numbers) that it is such a simple paradigm of computation that no book is needed to learn it, and it can be taught in 10 seconds.

https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/pocket_rewriting

replies(1): >>42069293 #
BoiledCabbage ◴[06 Nov 24 20:59 UTC] No.42069293[source]▶
I'm somewhat surprised there isn't a semi-mainstream language for it. It's incredibly simple, with very few core concepts yet very powerful.

Similar to LISP in that sense.

replies(5): >>42069569 #>>42069855 #>>42070879 #>>42071115 #>>42072164 #
alxmng ◴[06 Nov 24 23:21 UTC] No.42071115{3}[source]▶
I think the issue is performance. A true term rewriting system has to essentially operate on text, right?
replies(2): >>42071220 #>>42071290 #
1. simplify ◴[06 Nov 24 23:37 UTC] No.42071290{4}[source]▶
Not necessarily, I would think terms can be converted to numbers like how the Ruby vm compiles symbols.