I find that a very puzzling thing to say. Please give reasons for why RB might not be suitable for writing a compiler.
I think RS would be very interested in knowing about such deficiencies - they could then implement them. What are you suggesting would let down a RB produced compiler? Lack of pointers ? Umm don't think so.. Garbage collection ? Nope - there are many many studies and papers out there to show that garbage collected languages can be just as fast as those with memory handled "manually" ( C / C++ ) Lack of templates ?? Nope - a nice to have , but doesn't make for faster code. So why exactly would RB not fit the bill ? On 14/7/06 20:02, "Stefan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (and I still believe, that RB isn't the best suited languages > the implement a compiler/IDE), _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
