Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Shakespeare Programming Language

Posted by michael on from the civil-blood-makes-civil-hands-unclean dept.

Erik Tjernlund writes: "Oh, where art thou my lovely new programming language? Stop fiddling around with those perl magnets and use a real poetic computer language: The Shakespeare Programming Language. Not a compiler, but it converts to C. Cool 100+ line Hello World example. Amazing what CompSci-students can create when they really should do real work."

3 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Any CSS descrambling software in Shakespeare? by Jimmy_B · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Any CSS descrambling software in Shakespeare? Assuming this isn't a complete joke...
    Oh, what fools these moderators be. Of COURSE this is a complete joke; notice the category it's in, and read the sample program. It's easy to recognize which phrases have been designated to have language meanings, and that the way they're combined is grammatically-correct nonsense.
  2. Not a compiler? by p3d0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just because something uses C as its output language doesn't mean it's not a compiler. If it scans and parses text to build an abstract syntax tree like a duck, then generates intermediate code which gets optimized like a duck, then outputs the result in some target language like a duck, then it's a duck, regardless of which target language is used.

    C is actually quite a popular output language for compilers, because it means they don't have to do register allocation.

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  3. Re:Natural lang processing isn't real work? by joto · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Short-sightedness on the part of our story poster here. I think natural language processing, or at least work in its direction is "real work".

    Nope, this has nothing to do with natural language processing. If you had read the manual you would understand that as well. It is a fairly simple language quite similar to the original basic-dialects, with a lot of syntactic sugar. Adding syntactic sugar has very little to do with natural language processing.

    But I'm sure it was fun, and that they learned something in the process of creating it, so I wouldn't call it worthless...