Hi,
Here's a new language that may be of interest: a dynamically-typed
rewriting language, sort of a cross between Smalltalk and Haskell.
http://code.google.com/p/pure-lang/
Note the native-code LLVM backend.
Marcus
FRIAM Applied
Thanks to Owen for introducing those of us who were unfamiliar with
Steve Yegge to his blog (http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com). I found the
guy sufficiently entertaining (as well as insightful) to follow the
link from the blog to Stevey's Drunken Blog Rants (what a great
name!). In one of
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:58:43 -0700, Owen Densmore
o...@backspaces.net said:
I'm with Nick. Why? We have to separate understanding *architecture*
from implementation.
Architectural studies look at the system from a 50,000 foot view, so
that the student can understand how the whole
Owen wrote:
Architectural studies look at the system from a 50,000 foot view, so
that the student can understand how the whole system works.
Implementation studies look at how a practitioner would, on the job,
build part of a system.
If in fact it is possible for a student to
I finally got around to looking up the Lively Kernel:
http://research.sun.com/projects/lively/
I'm impressed! Entirely written in Javascript. No downloads required
(apparently like GoogleMaps, you use the Javascript library remotely,
at http://www.experimentalstuff.com)
This is
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Prof David West profw...@fastmail.fmwrote:
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:58:43 -0700, Owen Densmore
o...@backspaces.net said:
Re: Ruby -- It really does not cut it.
I probably agree - but can 100,000 avid users be wrong? I included it
in my list only on the
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Prof David West profw...@fastmail.fmwrote:
2. Except for a really dumb decision on the part of ParcPlace, Java
would never have come into existence. Sun wanted Smalltalk, and only
when rebuffed, decided to morph Oak to Java. (An earlier, equally
stupid,
Thus spake Prof David West circa 14/02/09 01:24 PM:
Language selection reasons like, it is too hard to learn, memory
leaks, it runs faster, Java developers are cheaper because there are
more of them, etc., are really dumb reasons for choosing a language.
Instead you should focus on your
Parks, Raymond wrote:
Owen Densmore wrote:
...
Really hip programming teams will define a subset of all these systems
that are platform independent -- i.e. work on all systems. They will
stick to these subsets, understanding that sometimes constraints
really are freedoms.
I
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Parks, Raymond wrote:
Owen Densmore wrote:
...
Really hip programming teams will define a subset of all these systems
that are platform independent -- i.e. work on all systems. They will
stick to these subsets, understanding that sometimes constraints
Given that a Steve Yegge blog post started this discussion, you might be
interested in another (earlier) post of his
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
and something more for the Javascript fan-boys:
http://javascript.crockford.com/javascript.html
BTW having
On Feb 16, 2009, at 12:12 PM, glen e. p. ropella wrote:
Thus spake Prof David West circa 14/02/09 01:24 PM:
Language selection reasons like, it is too hard to learn, memory
leaks, it runs faster, Java developers are cheaper because
there are
more of them, etc., are really dumb reasons for
Thus spake glen e. p. ropella circa 16/02/09 16:02 PM
The next trick is to transition ... to more
formal, repeatable, and communicable processes.
There are no such things.
Formal only applies in the small number of cases where the domain you
are trying to understand and in which your
Thus spake glen e. p. ropella circa 16/02/09 11:12 AM
When I write a
program for a client and that client's requirements include taking over
and developing the code themselves, then choosing Java because Java
developers are cheaper because there are more of them is not only NOT
dumb, it
They had the seed of one. Self did not have the class library and range
of functionality of Smalltalk and, more importantly for Sun, it had no
user base; at the time that Smalltalk was being touted as the next
COBOL because of the extent to which is was being used in industry.
There was, from
Thus spake Prof David West circa 16/02/09 05:51 PM:
It IS dumb. Not for you as the developer, but on the part of the client
for making it a requirement.
The client doesn't _make_ it a requirement, as if requirements are
created willy-nilly by some air-headed marketing type (no offense
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Prof David West profw...@fastmail.fmwrote:
Re: programming languages - antipathy to C++
Few questions seem to drive passions more than language choice -
The reason for this is that people who program are woefully ignorant or
misinformed about the majority
And I, too, would pay to attend such a workshop.
-tj
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Nick Frost ni...@nickorama.com wrote:
On Feb 15, 2009, at 4:52 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
That's a hard google: GLASS = Gemstone Linux Apache Seaside Smalltalk =
http://seaside.gemstone.com which didn't
Tom and Nick,
The GLASS workshop is the first of many - some will be shorter in
duration, but all will be workshops where you have the opportunity to
learn and immediately apply your knowledge to real software, not canned
examples that some instructor wrote.
Future offerings are dependent, to a
Looking forward to it. Do you have a schedule yet?
-tj
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Prof David West profw...@fastmail.fmwrote:
Tom and Nick,
The GLASS workshop is the first of many - some will be shorter in
duration, but all will be workshops where you have the opportunity to
learn
Re: programming languages - antipathy to C++
Few questions seem to drive passions more than language choice - In the
good old days the Smalltalk vs. C++ conflicts actually became physical
and the very real emotional rage that some people exhibited when their
language was dis'ed was truly
Prof David West wrote:
If you are trying to emulate a machine - i.e. solve a problem with a
known, formal, solution - use C or C++. That is what the language was
created to do, and nothing will be as 'machinelike' as a well-crafted
C++ program.
It's limiting that C is the primary language
The other day, I mentioned reading that Google had settled on 4
languages for work inside the company. It occurred to me to look up
the article. Here it is:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html
They use C++, Java, Python, and JavaScript.
Here's the quote:
One of
Owen,
John Cage the great 20th century composer used exactly this methodology
in creating his chance music and in collaboration with others. Also,
isn't following the protocols the way most scientific experiments are
done?
O
Owen Densmore wrote:
The other day, I mentioned reading that
For some while I've been kind of surprised, in a detached sort of way, at
the general disregard that the FRIAMers I talk with hold for C++. One
explanation that has been given me was Well, C++ is prone to horrible
memory management errors.
To which I respond: not if you code properly. And when
On Feb 12, 2009, at 8:07 PM, Douglas Roberts wrote:
For some while I've been kind of surprised, in a detached sort of
way, at the general disregard that the FRIAMers I talk with hold for
C++. [...]
Hi Doug,
Interesting topic! I don't know if I'm a typical FRIAMer (there is
probably no
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 06:07:31PM -0700, Douglas Roberts wrote:
For some while I've been kind of surprised, in a detached sort of way, at
the general disregard that the FRIAMers I talk with hold for C++. One
explanation that has been given me was Well, C++ is prone to horrible
memory
On Feb 12, 2009, at 5:47 PM, Orlando Leibovitz wrote:
Owen,
John Cage the great 20th century composer used exactly this
methodology in creating his chance music and in collaboration with
others. Also, isn't following the protocols the way most scientific
experiments are done?
Well,
28 matches
Mail list logo
