TIL that there's a format called wat, which means "WebAssembly text format" and it can be converted to wasm (and back to wat).<p>This format uses S-expressions like lisp, and it's got a stack machine like forth. [1] [2]<p>I'm a bit surprised something so mainstream ended up being a lispy forth.<p>[1] <a href="https://ph1lter.bitbucket.io/blog/2020-12-03-webasm-forth-with-lisp-syntax.html" rel="nofollow">https://ph1lter.bitbucket.io/blog/2020-12-03-webasm-forth-wi...</a>
[2] <a href="https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAssembly/Understanding_the_text_format" rel="nofollow">https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAssembly/Underst...</a>
Sugar - a typed lispy language targeting webasm/wat.<p>Compiler is incomplete but I have written some reasonably complex programs.<p>Interesting to read for the, very short, compiler.
I know WebAssembly language (WASM), as the thing Dfinity (<a href="https://sdk.dfinity.org/docs/index.html" rel="nofollow">https://sdk.dfinity.org/docs/index.html</a>) uses. They have a nice language called Motoko (<a href="https://sdk.dfinity.org/docs/language-guide/motoko.html" rel="nofollow">https://sdk.dfinity.org/docs/language-guide/motoko.html</a>) I was playing with. But I like the idea of this kind of Lispy Forth.
I really like the power and flexibility of Lisps, but I am so much more productive with good(!) statical typesystems.<p>Looking at both typed racket and now sugar, it doesn't look really good to me. I think I would rather decide to go straight for Haskell/Scala/... or Lisp/Clojure. Maybe it's not really possible to combine both in a good way _yet_, or maybe it's not possible in general. I hope for the former.
When I read about a new typed Lisp I always hope to see a Lisp with Haskell-like type annotations. Is this easily feasible? That would be real <i>sugar</i>.
Will you say it is ok for a complete new person to lisp to learn sugar? Example is someone who has never learnt lisp in life?<p>Or will you recommend learning sugar after learning some other lisp?