This isn't our idea, but was a favorite topic in the 60s, and was championed by 
Ted Steel, who proposed than an UNCOL (UNiversal Computer Oriented Language) 
which could be the intermediary in all translations, especially where the end 
target was machine code.

As is often the case, something accidental happened that wasn't as good -- 
namely C. And is often the case, people only interested in short term goals 
started using C and the larger idea of UNCOL never happened.

In some of the other correspondence, the loss of expressibility through 
translation is mentioned. UNCOL also had this problem. I think quite a bit of 
work by an expert system has to be added to something like OMeta in order to 
both retain expressibility, recover it, and generate it (when the target is 
more 
expressive than the source).

(And Frank isn't awesome yet, but we have achieved a small measure of scary ...)

Cheers,

Alan




________________________________
From: Julian Leviston <[email protected]>
To: Fundamentals of New Computing <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, April 8, 2011 8:56:48 PM
Subject: Re: [fonc] Question about OMeta

Thanks for responding to my stupid question. :-)

OMeta is quite simple, which makes it very very difficult for me to think about 
sometimes (often!) :)

That's pretty fricking awesome... because it obviously means you just have to 
do 
two translations to get all the existing translations to and from other 
languages "for free"... including compilers and interpreters.

I guess this is why Frank is so potentially amazingly awesome, right? It's 
built 
on this idea :)

I also really like the idea that you're not just "throwing away" all the 
existing stuff in the process of readdressing these extremely base level 
concerns... because it's obvious that that doesn't work.

You guys rock :) I just wanna take this opportunity to give thanks that there 
are still people like you who are continuing this sort of things for the good 
of 
us all.

Julian.


On 09/04/2011, at 7:46 AM, Alan Kay 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 <[email protected]>
>To: Fundamentals of New Computing <[email protected]>
>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
>[email protected]
>http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>_______________________________________________
>fonc mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Reply via email to