On Tue, April 10, 2007 12:09 pm, Chuck Esterbrook wrote:
> On 4/10/07, Lan Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, April 9, 2007 8:58 pm, Darren New wrote:
>> > Chuck Esterbrook wrote:
>> >> pipes approach of the posix command line but for programming
>> >
>> > I think the general term applied to such concepts overall is "data
>> flow
>> > languages". You might have better luck searching for that.
>> >
>>
>> My vague memories of C++ output conventions (I'm in therapy for C++
>> PTSD)
>> include flash-backs of using << and | in printf statements. Is this what
>> you mean?
>
> No, this would be something more fundamental to the language. Like it
> would give the language a different feel throughout your code, not
> just for I/O.
>

Hmm ... centuries ago I took a C/Unix programming course in which we
simulated (actually, recreated) the pipe function by overwriting the stdin
of a process with the stdout of another. Are you saying there might be
languages based on this?

Because I would think that any scripting language (like Tcl) that allows
new commands to be added using C could easily develop a couple of commands
that would do that (and undo it afterward). But because I have no feel for
how it would be used in programming (other than what could be done by
opening a pipe file or calling a pipe in a shell), I'd probably botch it.

Or am I just not getting this?

-- 
Lan Barnes

SCM Analyst              Linux Guy
Tcl/Tk Enthusiast        Biodiesel Brewer

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg

Reply via email to