Does'nt smalltalk have code=data behavior without s-expressions. I'm not an expert, but I thought that was the reason why Smalltalk has the IDE that everyone raves about along with image persistence
Or can Smalltalk be modelled as an s-exp based language?
I don't think Smalltalk has code=data. It has object-based metaprogramming, i.e. the code that you write turns into objects that you can write other code to manipulate at runtime. But perhaps that's a distinction without a difference? I don't have enough experience with Smalltalk to say.
I was expecting someone to suggest that stack-based languages are fundamentally different from tree-based ones.
I was expecting someone to suggest that stack-based languages are fundamentally different from tree-based ones.