Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Re (2): Why didn't ML ever 'shine'?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
George Neuner  
View profile  
 More options Sep 9 2012, 12:41 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.functional
From: George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 00:41:27 -0400
Local: Sun, Sep 9 2012 12:41 am
Subject: Re: Re (2): Why didn't ML ever 'shine'?

On Sat, 8 Sep 2012 06:00:30 +0000 (UTC), no.top.p...@gmail.com wrote:
>In article <pan.2012.09.07.04.04.34.219...@nowhere.com>, Nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>> The code-is-data aspect of Lisp is an advantage for writing
>> domain-specific languages.

>Yes, code-is-data-is-code allows develishly convoluted acrobatics.
>When I started coding I wrote mostly convoluted code.
>Often I had to put myself into a yoga-like-trance-state to
>understand it during development.

It's not about high-flying acrobatics ... mostly it's about JIT
compilation.  In Lisp (or Scheme) the compiler is available at
runtime, so a DSL can translate the foreign language to Lisp and
compile rather than interpreting.

I get the sense that you know this, but your comment leads in a
strange direction.  8-)

>== Chris Glur.

George

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.