Now, that is the first answer that convinces me - at least partially. :-)

"Dan Sugalski" <dan / sidhe.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:a05210617bb4d01c0c2b7@[63.120.19.221]...
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 11:15:18 +0900, Robert Klemme wrote:
> >>  On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> >>>  Over on the pragprog list, Ron Jeffries suggested that it might be
> >>>  interesting to implement Ruby in Ruby. I thought -- but could not
find
> >>>  quickly -- that someone had started such a project. I realise right
now
> >>>  that this might be much slower, but it would seem to me to make it
> >>>  easier to make something like Rite or some other bytecode system
> >>>  possible, wouldn't it?
> >  Maybe I'm beeing stupid but I can't see the advantage in doing this
other
> >  than intellectual challenge and interest.  Is there any other?
>
> The big advantage is it forces someone to go through and fully
> specify the syntax, which is quite valuable.

IMHO this has been done already.

> It also would give you a
> pluggable library you could use in, say, a syntax-highlighting IDE or
> refactoring browser, since you can't properly highlight syntax or
> refactor if you can't parse the code.

Yep, that's an advantage!

Thanks!

    robert