Surely if the translation is efficient, then you can simply translate everything (libraries, too) down to a sub-machine machine code... which wouldn't take too much space - in fact it'd probably take less space than existing compiled libraries AND their documentation.
... maybe we could call this layer "Nothing"... ? ;-) Julian. On 09/04/2011, at 10:10 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote: > So if I wanted to translate a Java application to C# (which ought to be > pretty trivial, given the similarity,) what would I do about the libraries? > Or the native interfaces? > > It seems like a lot of the semantics of modern (read: industrial 60s/70s > tech) programs really live in libraries written in lower modes of > abstraction, over FFI interfaces, etc. I doubt it's as easy to translate this > stuff as it is core application code (plumbing, usually, which usually > delivers the various electronic effluvia between the libraries in use.) > > I wonder what the folks here might suggest? Is there a fifth corner in the > room that I'm not turning? > > I'd really like to be able to look at a program in the language of my > choosing... I just don't know how useful that is when I find out that #foo > happens to use an FFI over to something written in assembler and running on > an emulator. It sounds ridiculous, but I never run out of ridiculous in my > way doing this stuff for a living:) > > I think about "rebuilding the world" in a way that keeps algorithms in a > repo, a la Mathematica. Pure algorithms/functions, math really, seem to be > easier in some cases to compose than classes/inheritance/etc (am I wrong? I > could be wrong here.) > > I don't see a way to do anything like this without first burning the disk > packs, which is a bummer, because if there was a really workable way to > translate large applications, I know some folks with COBOL apps who might > have interesting work for me (I'm a sucker for old systems. It's like digging > up an odd ceramic pot in the back yard and wondering who left it there, when, > why. Technological archeology and such. I'm also a sucker for shiny new > technology like OMeta, so I picture gobs of fun.) > > Fortunately I have some of the best people in the world hard at work on > burning my disk packs! Thanks VPRI:) Can't wait to dig into Frank and see > what's there. Huge fan of HyperCard, so I'm really pleased to see the > direction it's taking. > > On Apr 8, 2011, at 2:46 PM, Alan Kay <alan.n...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> It does that all the time. An easy way to do it is to make up a universal >> semantics, perhaps in AST form, then write translators into and out of. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Alan >> >> From: Julian Leviston <jul...@leviston.net> >> To: Fundamentals of New Computing <fonc@vpri.org> >> Sent: Fri, April 8, 2011 7:24:28 AM >> Subject: [fonc] Question about OMeta >> >> I have a question about OMeta. >> >> Could it be used in any way to efficiently translate programs between >> languages? I've been thinking about this for a number of months now... and >> it strikes me that it should be possible...? >> >> Julian. >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> fonc@vpri.org >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >> _______________________________________________ >> fonc mailing list >> fonc@vpri.org >> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
