"Henrik Hjelte" henrik.hjelte@stix.to writes: [...]
But I can agree that sometimes a higher level language would be nice, and I have also dreamt of all the features mentioned. I am willing to hack on a new language that is more high level, but then I suggest we have two layers: Parenscript as it is now (defined by my feature list above and the current syntax) as the low level language, call it parenscript-one. A new high level language (parenscript two) that compiles to parenscript one. But I suggest a clear division between the layers.
My idea was to try to make sure that any extra features added did not impact on usage of plain parenscript-one in any way (except perhaps to optimise the code generated without semantic changes), unless the extra features were actually used.
It is a good point that this idea is probably quite optimistic in practice, and a clear way of being able to emit only parenscript-one should definitely be kept.
[...]