- As Martin fowler said "As a result it certainly seems to me that certain languages are more suited to in-language DSL than others. Seeing lisp and smalltalk I concluded that the more suitable languages were minimalist ones with a single basic idea that's deeper and simpler than traditional languages (function application for lisp, objects and messages for smalltalk). But Ruby is more conventional and a much bigger language than these two, yet is still suitable for in-language DSLs."
So
Ruby certainly sounds like a language which can rapidize (Not sure that's legal word or not, but I felt like using it here) business application building.
3 comments:
Very pretty design! Keep up the good work. Thanks.
»
Very best site. Keep working. Will return in the near future.
»
Especially I like the first site. But other links are informative too, if you are interested check all those links.http://neveo.info/2731.html and http://googleindex.info/2216.html
Post a Comment