Homoiconicity

In computer programming, homoiconicity (from the Greek words homo- meaning "the same" and icon meaning "representation") is an informal property of some programming languages. A language is homoiconic if a program written in it can be manipulated as data using the language.[1] The program's internal representation can thus be inferred just by reading the program itself. This property is often summarized by saying that the language treats code as data. The informality of the property arises from the fact that, strictly, this applies to almost all programming languages. No consensus exists on a precise definition of the property.[2][3]

In a homoiconic language, the primary representation of programs is also a data structure in a primitive type of the language itself.[1] This makes metaprogramming easier than in a language without this property: reflection in the language (examining the program's entities at runtime) depends on a single, homogeneous structure, and it does not have to handle several different structures that would appear in a complex syntax. Homoiconic languages typically include full support of syntactic macros, allowing the programmer to express transformations of programs in a concise way.

A commonly cited example is Lisp, which was created to allow for easy list manipulations and where the structure is given by S-expressions that take the form of nested lists, and can be manipulated by other Lisp code.[4] Other examples are the programming languages Clojure (a contemporary dialect of Lisp), Rebol (also its successor Red), Refal, Prolog, and possibly Julia (see the section “Implementation methods” for more details).

  1. ^ a b Ceravola, Antonello; Joublin, Frank (2021). "From JSON to JSEN through Virtual Languages". Open Journal of Web Technologies. 8 (1): 1–15. In a homoiconic language, the primary representation of programs is also a data structure in a primitive type of the language itself
  2. ^ van Schelven, Klaas (2018-03-01). "Don't Say "Homoiconic"". Retrieved 2024-10-16. Unfortunately, this rather straightforward definition is not the only one in active use. There is in fact a proliferation of alternative, and entirely misguided, definitions, some of which are quite persistent.
  3. ^ Herman, David (2012-04-17). "Homoiconicity isn't the point". Retrieved 2024-10-16. I've never really understood what "homoiconic" is supposed to mean. People often say something like "the syntax uses one of the language's basic data structures." That's a category error: syntax is not a data structure, it's just a representation of data as text.
  4. ^ Wheeler, David A. "Readable Lisp S-expressions".