Does scheme give you access to the compiler's internal data structures? Can you for example write an extension that scans through the compiled code looking for, say, for loops and replacing them with something else?
It's not my goal to make the system able to parse arbitrary existing languages. The parser can deal with ambiguity by branching parsing states, but despite that it still won't be easy to parse inherently ambiguous grammars, and even if that was easy to do I still would push against it as that would be in conflict with the language's goal of unifying different programming areas under one language with consistent syntax. It wouldn't be much useful language if your code is written like c++ in one place and like, say, Ruby or SQL in another. You need your code to be consistent and the language to be consistent as well, otherwise learning the language would be difficult and understanding the fragmented user code would also be difficult.
The main benefit behind being able to parse existing languages is for porting existing code, but that can be done using external conversion tools.
My language is not only about user defined syntax; it's also about user defined code generation. For example, you can define your own syntax that compiles directly into a DB stored procedure or into GPU shader, or into whatever technology that might be invented in the future, like for example quantum computing. In fact, it's less about user defined syntax than it is about user defined code generation as I am trying to limit new syntax into certain patterns rather than leave it in the wild.
I am. I am working on a new programming language designed for the next generations. The language re-imagines the role of the compiler from being a monolithic static blackbox that converts source to executable, into being an open dynamic system the manages the language syntax and compilation process, but leaves the final syntax and actual compilation to hot pluggable libraries. Why? To make the language dynamically upgradable, and on a per-project basis. This is the only way to make a language future-proof. More details:
http://alusus.nethttp://alusus.net/overview
P.S.
the project is still at a very early stage, but a proof of concept is there.
Another one of those disorganized people wishing the world can become disorganized as well so they can live in it.
Face it, hierarchical file systems have been around for decades, and if this proves anything, it proves that hierarchical file systems are successful and are the way to go. If there is anything we need to change in file systems then it's things under the hood, i.e. speed it up, prevent fragmentation, etc.