On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Dan Bron <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now, I don't know enough about Lisp to tell you if its domain is distinct
> enough from J's that the creole would be more expressive than either
> language individually.  But since I enjoy J (both theory and practice) as
> a hobby, I often thought I might also enjoy learning, using, and
> discussing other "weird" languages.  Lisp and Haskell top of my list
> (though I leaned towards Lisp because I enjoy metaprogramming but consider
> strong typing and type systems an impediment to productive programming).
> But I've never really gotten up the initiative to start.

Traditional lisp implements its lists as pairs:  The first element
of the list and a reference to the rest of the list.  This is
very different from how J implements lists, so I would expect
that translating data from one environment to the other would
involve some non-trivial overhead.

Also, some lisp data  structures could not be translated directly
to J arrays, for example consider a circular list which has itself
for the "rest of the list" part.  But a J representation which
preserves this "feature" would be inefficient and clumsy for
most computational tasks.

So... I think you would need to focus on a specific application
domain for an implementation of this sort, to help you discard
some of the complexities which would plague a "do what I
say" design.

FYI,

-- 
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to