Write Yourself a Haskell in Lisp | Hacker News Reader

Write Yourself a Haskell in Lisp

gergo.erdi.hu

129 pointsmalloc4713 comments

If you're interested in something similar but a little more theoretical, take a look at "Simply Easy"[1], a little paper on implementing a couple of variations on the lambda calculus. The main idea is to demonstrate how to evaluate a dependently typed language.

It starts by looking at how to evaluate the simply typed lambda calculus and then going from that to a dependently typed lambda calculus. Surprisingly, the transformation is not all that complicated!

The actual code is in Haskell.

[1]: http://strictlypositive.org/Easy.pdf

Cool. Does it qualify as some sort of mutual recursion if you use haskell to build a lisp which builds haskell?

You can use this tutorial for the first step if you want to do it: Write Yourself a Scheme in 48 Hours by Jonathan Tang. http://jonathan.tang.name/files/scheme_in_48/tutorial/overvi...

It would be interesting to see how many languages you could nest before the interpreter becomes too slow to be of use.

What would be interesting about it?

seeing how many languages you could nest before the interpreter becomes too slow to be of use.

I've always thought that this would be a better definition of what a "compiler" is vs what an "interpreter" is:

A compiler, if asked to "execute" itself a million times will generate code that is still reasonably fast.

An interpreter, if asked to "execute" itself a million times, will generate code that is a million times slower.

Theoretically, one could write an interpreter specifically for the purpose of nesting other interpreters, which would then (nearly) remove itself from memory as it transfers control to the second interpreter, but I know I'm not quite insane enough to start working on such a thing.

Hehe, I love this. I have been doing something similar, writing a compiler of Scheme-like language to x86 in Haskell.

https://bitbucket.org/quiark/hsc

The whole purpose of that mental gymnastics was to learn x86 assembly while practicing my Haskell ;)

Another 'X written in Y' post. Awesome.

I think I'll save myself the wasted time and just use X from the get-go.

Well, the semantics of a lazy language are a bit different than usual. While I agree that pages of s-expressions are hard to feel, seeing the graph reduction algorithm on a few examples was quite refreshing.

The point isn't to replace X. It's to learn more about X and Y.

Make the Yule-tide gay.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com