| Isn't this one of the reasons GT.M was kind enough to release the source code, to allow the _community_ to produce changes/improvements/additions? Except for the very core functions that are not open-source, I believe we have the technology. We can rebuild it. ;-) On Oct 6, 2005, at 11:27 AM, Kevin Toppenberg wrote: If GT.M were to implement this, certainly someone would have to fund it.
Perhaps a more generalized approach would be good, where GT.M allows "plug-in" modules for language extension?
Then again, I think it already has ways to call into and out of external languages, so perhaps it is already there.
Kevin
On 10/6/05, Greg Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I know this is a very general question, but given the level of interest
in language extensions, I wonder if extending GT.M beyond the existing
ANSI standard is a possibility. Of course, updating the standard is the
most desirable course, but is that an option?
Implementations such as Cache' offer extensions to the language that
are now verboten in VistA, and given the community's interest in
running VistA on GT.M, I would not want to see changes that were
incompatible with GT.M.
===
Gregory Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Without the requirement of mathematical aesthetics a great many discoveries would not have been made."
-- Albert Einstein
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
|
