On 07/14/2012 05:24 PM, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:

On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr@gmx.ch

<mailto:timon.gehr@gmx.ch>> wrote:

    On 07/14/2012 04:44 PM, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:

        ...

        For instance, everybody seems to love hard-wiring the syntax
        into the
        language.


    Insignificant example.

    Every language _needs_ to have a standard source storage format.

Syntax has nothing to do with standard source stage. Why won't the
standard source stage be binary,

Obviously syntax has to do with standard source storage. The syntax
definition can be binary just fine, eg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_lambda_calculus

while leaving the human-written part (the syntax)

That is not the definition of _the_ syntax.

up to the writer?

This is already the case. Writing a parser that transforms your custom syntax to the standard syntax is trivial.

The reason why almost nobody is doing this is the same as the reason
why almost everyone strives to stick to the same English orthography
rules.