[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MzScheme and SML

Subject: Re: MzScheme and SML
From: Jerzy Karczmarczuk <karczma@info.unicaen.fr>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:40:31 +0000
CC: plt-scheme@fast.cs.utah.edu
Organization: University of Caen, France
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102160401001.28449-100000@info.numeric-quest.com> <006401c09856$aeb76d80$5d0c1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <000d01c0986d$cd9a69c0$0100007f@cradle> <200102170049.TAA05420@bosch.cs.brown.edu> <20010217023654.684C05E0EA@sith.bbb.caltech.edu>
Sender: owner-plt-scheme@fast.cs.utah.edu

Michael Vanier wrote:

> A more interesting question is what he means by "semantic havoc".  Does
> anyone know of any work on incorporating macros into statically typed
> languages?  It doesn't sound like an intractable problem to me.

Clean has them.

=====

Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> 
> Ji-Yong D. Chung wrote:
> 
> >     Had I known about ML, perhaps I would have
> > implemented that instead,

> Too bad you hadn't heard of Fortran.  Of all the languages I have
> seen, it seems to be the one easiest to compile for serious speed.

Easiest? perhaps for subset, but the *whole* language is not so
easy to compile because of some imprecisions in design.
Did you really try to analyze the bedlam generated by EQUIVALENCE
and COMMON blocks in old glorious Fortran? In F90 you have dynamic
arrays...

Jerzy Karczmarczuk
Caen, France

References:
- Re: Just for your fun and horror
  - From: Jan Skibinski <jans@numeric-quest.com>
- Re: Just for your fun and horror
  - From: "Erik Meijer" <erik@meijcrosoft.com>
- MzScheme and SML
  - From: "Ji-Yong D. Chung" <virtualcyber@erols.com>
- MzScheme and SML
  - From: Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk@cs.brown.edu>
- Re: MzScheme and SML
  - From: Michael Vanier <mvanier@bbb.caltech.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: reading external representation
Next by Date: Re: Just for your fun and horror
Prev by thread: Re: MzScheme and SML
Next by thread: Re: MzScheme and SML
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread