This runtime just needs to be ported to other operating systems
similarily to the Java runtime.
So it's a question of either source availability - or at least a very
complete specification - or Microsoft strategy.
With the SDK that you can download from MS comes a 500 page specification
On 14-Aug-2000, Benjamin Leon Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tyson Dowd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't believe you can teach programmers anything by
trying to take
tools away from them.
I believe you can only teach programmers by showing them
a better tool.
Aha, but *which*
Fergus Henderson wrote:
On 14-Aug-2000, Benjamin Leon Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, a testable hypothesis! If you are right, then you should be able to
provide an example of a language that meets the requirements of writing
both low-level kernel code and most user applications
Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 8:10 AM
To: Tyson Dowd; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Craig Dickson
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 22:36:42 +1000
Tyson Dowd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11-Aug-2000, Craig Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antony
On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 22:36:42 +1000
Tyson Dowd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11-Aug-2000, Craig Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antony Courtney wrote:
stuff deleted/stuff deleted
will be coming from C and C++ where it is perfectly
normal to do all sorts
of things that the compiler
Benjamin Leon Russell wrote:
Tyson Dowd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11-Aug-2000, Craig Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
stuff deleted/stuff deleted
will be coming from C and C++ where it is perfectly
normal to do all sorts of things that the compiler
cannot guarantee to be
On 11-Aug-2000, Craig Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antony Courtney wrote:
But Java also has a way to do "rampant pointer-level
optimization": You declare a method as "native" and
then implement it in C.
That's hardly the same thing, though. Of course an FFI allows you do to all
Hello,
On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, Tyson Dowd wrote:
will be coming from C and C++ where it is perfectly normal to do all sorts
of things that the compiler cannot guarantee to be safe. This leads to all
sorts of bugs such as buffer overflows, stack corruption, page faults
accessing unmapped
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:53:39 +0800
Lyndon While [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 6:46 pm -0400 10/8/2000, Benjamin Leon Russell wrote:
Somebody once wrote that a clearly written,
well-documented program
that doesn't work is usually more valuable than a badly
written,
poorly-documented program
On 13-Aug-2000, Sylvan Ravinet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
will be coming from C and C++ where it is perfectly normal to do all sorts
of things that the compiler cannot guarantee to be safe. This leads to all
sorts of bugs such as buffer overflows, stack corruption, page faults
On Fri 11 Aug, George Russell wrote:
However REALLY worst-time-bounded garbage collection is very expensive in
CPU time. (Is there anything better than Baker's train algorithm?)
In any case even if you do have garbage-collection, you will still need to
demonstrate that you won't run out of
On Fri 11 Aug, Sengan wrote:
I don't buy this: for a long time the embedded hard realtime people
refused to use CPUs with cache because they would be
"non-deterministic".
(I assume "non-deterministic" in this context means we can't determine the
execution time of a bit of code, even knowing
On Fri 11 Aug, Byron Hale wrote:
I don't mean that threads are non-deterministic, but that the execution
time of a GC thread seems to be non-deterministic. Large collections need
more time than small ones and the time required is some function of the
store to be collected, is it not?
Sort
On Fri 11 Aug, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty wrote:
Erlang applications are characterised as being soft-realtime
applications:
http://www.erlang.org/faq/x847.html#SOFT-REALTIME
In one sentence, I would characterise this as ``it is fast
enough most of the time.'' This seems to be good
Adrian Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
My objection to the use of GC (and by implication all current Haskell
implementations) in embedded systems would be that if your program is
sufficiently complex/powerful that it can't be implemented as some kind
of _finite_ state machine, then it can never
On 10-Aug-2000, Brent Fulgham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can download it here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/#sdk
There is a C# compiler and runtime environment in the SDK.
Thanks for the link! Unfortunately, its click-through
license forbids disassembly, reverse
Byron Hale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
At 05:21 AM 8/11/2000 +0100, you wrote:
On Fri 11 Aug, Byron Hale wrote:
Also, garbage collection is unlikely to satisfy any need
for automatic memory management in real-time systems for the foreseeable
future because an extra thread on a single
On 11-Aug-2000, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ketil Malde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
"Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A good analysis of were C# fits re Java and C++ is at
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/08/09/1612254mode=thread
On 02-Aug-2000, Doug Ransom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The PDC slides and white papers should be available if you dig
through this site:
http://commnet.pdc.mscorpevents.com/default.asp
In particular http://commnet.pdc.mscorpevents.com/sessions.asp.
However, as seems to be usual (%*^#*^#@!) for
At 4:59 pm -0230 10/8/00, Theodore Norvell wrote:
With Haskell# or Mondrian: Can I use C# to create an instance of
a Haskell class? Can I use Haskell to extend a C# abstract class?
I suspect the answer to both these questions is currently no.
If future versions of .NET and Haskell variants change
-Original Message-
From: Fergus Henderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 4:18 AM
...
In particular http://commnet.pdc.mscorpevents.com/sessions.asp.
However, as seems to be usual (%*^#*^#@!) for MS, this page is NOT
written in portable HTML. Certainly
Antony Courtney wrote:
But Java also has a way to do "rampant pointer-level
optimization": You declare a method as "native" and
then implement it in C.
That's hardly the same thing, though. Of course an FFI allows you do to all
sorts of things, but at least it's very clear, from the fact
On Fri 11 Aug, Byron Hale wrote:
Also, garbage collection is unlikely to satisfy any need
for automatic memory management in real-time systems for the foreseeable
future because an extra thread on a single processor is still
non-deterministic.
I don't buy this: for a long time the
On 11-Aug-2000, R.S. Nikhil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Fergus Henderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 4:18 AM
...
In particular http://commnet.pdc.mscorpevents.com/sessions.asp.
However, as seems to be usual (%*^#*^#@!) for
Sengan wrote:
I don't buy this: for a long time the embedded hard realtime people
refused to use CPUs with cache because they would be
"non-deterministic".
They finally gave up, realizing that CPU's with caches are much faster.
If garbage collection is relatively cheap and makes it 10x
George Russell wrote:
(Is there anything better than Baker's train algorithm?)
Sorry, I meant "treadmill" not "train". The train algorithm is an almost-bounded
garbage collection algorithm. (However it fails to be
properly bounded if you have large numbers of in-pointers to a node.)
Replying to Fergus Henderson's complaints about non-portable HMTL in the web
document at http://commnet.pdc.mscorpevents.com/sessions.asp, R. S. Nikhil
writes:
And is Netscape Communicator 4.61 on Linux (bugs and all) a definitive
test of portable HTML? :-)
No. A definitive test
I wrote:
... http://validator.w3.com/ ...
which should be http://validator.w3.org/. Sorry about that ...
--
John David Stone - Lecturer in Computer Science and Philosophy
Manager of the Mathematics Local-Area Network
Grinnell College - Grinnell, Iowa 50112 -
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, R.S. Nikhil wrote:
And is Netscape Communicator 4.61 on Linux (bugs and all) a definitive
test of portable HTML? :-)
Actually it seems to be quite readable by lynx...
-Sylvan
--
Do, or do not. There's no try. -Yoda
Sylvan Ravinet: http://www.ravinet.com/sylvan/contact
Sylvan Ravinet wrote:
Do, or do not. There's no try. -Yoda
Pedantic not to be, but in contractions speak, does Yoda not. Is quote, "Do,
or do not. There is no 'try'."
Craig
No. A definitive test is to submit the page to the validator at the World
Wide Web Consortium's web site (http://validator.w3.com/), which (not
surprisingly) finds 455 HTML errors, beginning with the absence of a document
type declaration.
I bet you that 99% web pages on
On 11-Aug-2000, Sylvan Ravinet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, R.S. Nikhil wrote:
And is Netscape Communicator 4.61 on Linux (bugs and all) a definitive
test of portable HTML? :-)
Actually it seems to be quite readable by lynx...
Yes -- that's the worst part. In Lynx and
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:06:55 -0500
John David Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replying to Fergus Henderson's complaints about
non-portable HMTL in the web
document at http://commnet.pdc.mscorpevents.com/sessions.asp,
R. S. Nikhil
writes:
And is Netscape Communicator 4.61 on Linux (bugs
Florian Hard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How did they say on segfault.org:
Microsoft plans to expand Marketese in the future, adding a pound sign
to every language currently in their suite of compilers and a plus
sign to every acronym currently used to describe Microsoft technology.
You can download it here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/#sdk
There is a C# compiler and runtime environment in the SDK.
Thanks for the link! Unfortunately, its click-through
license forbids disassembly, reverse engineering, and a
raft of other endeavors that one should be allowed
Brent Fulgham wrote:
Thanks for the link! Unfortunately, its click-through
license forbids disassembly, reverse engineering, and a
raft of other endeavors that one should be allowed if
they were truly interested in global acceptance.
Well, this _is_ Microsoft, after all.
Of course, a few
Thanks to Nigel for answering my question
Tyson Dowd wrote:
Microsoft indicates that C# will not support "genericity", through
even anything as crude as C++'s templates, so it is unlikely that
they will seek to support functional programming languages in the
short term. Perhaps this
On 10-Aug-2000, Brent Fulgham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hope they at least get rid of
the hungarian notation while they are at it.
Yes, thankfullly they have indeed done that. That one got a round of
applause even from the (mostly) Microsoft faithful who attended PDC,
when it was mentioned
On 10-Aug-2000, Theodore Norvell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With Haskell# or Mondrian: Can I use C# to create an instance of
a Haskell class? Can I use Haskell to extend a C# abstract class?
I suspect the answer to both these questions is currently no.
I'm not sure either, but I think the
What bothers me most about C# is that although, at first glance, it seems to be a
variation on Java, it doesn't follow the spirit of Java in at least one important
respect.
Specifically, one common advantage of both Haskell and Java is that they encourage
higher-order abstraction: Haskell
Benjamin Leon Russell wrote:
However, according to the C# Language Reference,
"For developers who are generally content with
automatic memory management but sometimes need
fine-grained control or that extra iota of
performance, C# provides the ability to write
unsafe code. Such code can
At 06:46 PM 8/10/2000 -0400, you wrote:
What bothers me most about C# is that although, at first glance, it seems
to be a variation on Java, it doesn't follow the spirit of Java in at
least one important respect.
Specifically, one common advantage of both Haskell and Java is that they
Benjamin Leon Russell wrote:
[example of an unsafe method in C#]
Taken to an extreme, this ability could encourage some programmers to
ignore the spirit of higher-level abstraction and focus back on The Old
Way (TOW): rampant pointer-level optimization to squeeze out that extra
iota of
Ketil Malde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
"Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A good analysis of were C# fits re Java and C++ is at
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/08/09/1612254mode=thread
Wherein we read:
One new feature that I mentioned already was that of
On Fri 11 Aug, Byron Hale wrote:
Also, garbage collection is unlikely to satisfy any need
for automatic memory management in real-time systems for the foreseeable
future because an extra thread on a single processor is still
non-deterministic.
I'm not sure this is true, doesn't it depend
At 6:46 pm -0400 10/8/2000, Benjamin Leon Russell wrote:
Somebody once wrote that a clearly written, well-documented program
that doesn't work is usually more valuable than a badly written,
poorly-documented program that does work because it can easily be
fixed and reused.
Who wrote this?
Is
At 05:21 AM 8/11/2000 +0100, you wrote:
On Fri 11 Aug, Byron Hale wrote:
Also, garbage collection is unlikely to satisfy any need
for automatic memory management in real-time systems for the foreseeable
future because an extra thread on a single processor is still
non-deterministic.
I'm
Byron Hale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
At 06:46 PM 8/10/2000 -0400, you wrote:
What bothers me most about C# is that although, at first glance, it seems
to be a variation on Java, it doesn't follow the spirit of Java in at
least one important respect.
Specifically, one common advantage of
At 4:09 pm + 8/8/00, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:17:15 +0200, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
You hit the nail right on the head wrt to Haskell and .NET. This is
precisely why I am working on Mondrian, which also goes under the name
Haskell#, a pure, lazy
I've been following this discussion, but there are so many new buzzwords
coming out of microsoft that it's a bit confusing for those not
in the know. Is there a quick way to summarize the relationships
between
.NET
NGWS
C# (which I've discovered is intended to be
At 11:01 am -0230 9/8/00, Theodore Norvell wrote:
I've been following this discussion, but there are so many new buzzwords
coming out of microsoft that it's a bit confusing for those not
in the know. Is there a quick way to summarize the relationships
between
.NET
The name for a whole
Nigel Perry wrote:
NGWS
An older temporary name for .NET. NGWS? Never Goes Wonderfully Sucks?
I think somebody shot the marketing guy and replaced him, she then
came up with ".NET" :-)
Next Generation Windows Services (I think), as opposed to older generations
such as the Win32 APIs and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk) writes:
Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:17:15 +0200, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
Haskell#
This is what worries me: modifying a bunch of languages to make them
incompatible with the rest of the world
How did they say on segfault.org:
Microsoft
[discussion of benefits and otherwise of .NET, C#, ..]
They have definitely managed to attract some attention, haven't they?-)
If we put language and other wars aside for the moment, there are a few
questions that haven't come up yet, the answers to which would interest
me (and seem relevant
Theodore Norvell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
I've been following this discussion, but there are so many new buzzwords
coming out of microsoft that it's a bit confusing for those not
in the know.
That's part of the masterplan ;-)
Is there a quick way to summarize the relationships
between
On 09-Aug-2000, Brent Fulgham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Prepare for rant
Hopefully that won't be the case. However, I feel uncomfortable with
the whole .NET/C# situation. Like clockwork, MS releases yet another
new product that they claim will change the world. Meanwhile, there is
no C#
Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:17:15 +0200, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
You hit the nail right on the head wrt to Haskell and .NET. This is
precisely why I am working on Mondrian, which also goes under the name
Haskell#, a pure, lazy functional language that seamlessly fits the .NET
type
"Chris Saunders" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems to me that this .Net thingy is a runtime and therefore
could potentially be as portable as anything from Java.
Potentially, yes.
This runtime just needs to be ported to other operating systems
similarily to the Java runtime.
So it's a
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 12:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
We're drifting a bit off Haskell here, but...
At 10:57 am +1000 4/8/00, Kevin Glynn wrote:
I don't believe this says anything about support for other OS's. I
think
Erhard
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
"Jürgen A. Erhard" wrote:
"Manuel" == Manuel M T Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Manuel "Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
[...] The lab is *sponsored* by Microsoft, but
"Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
I'm weird, but not a true 'CS' person. I run Linux -- do I
need to move to NetBSD?
The single Linux box we have in the Microsoft lab was severely hacked from
the outside, they have moved to FreeBSD, which is supposed to be safer (I
hope so).
"Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
The single Linux box we have in the Microsoft lab was severely hacked
from
the outside, they have moved to FreeBSD, which is supposed to be safer
(I
hope so).
Morale: Never trust a Linux box at Microsoft :-)
The lab is *sponsored* by
"Manuel" == Manuel M T Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Manuel "Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
The single Linux box we have in the Microsoft lab was severely hacked
from
the outside, they have moved to FreeBSD, which is supposed to be safer
(I
hope
"Jürgen A. Erhard" wrote:
"Manuel" == Manuel M T Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Manuel "Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote,
[...] The lab is *sponsored* by Microsoft, but definitively not *at*
Microsoft. I doubt there are any Linux boxes at Microsoft :-)
I'm weird, but not a true 'CS' person. I run Linux -- do I
need to move to NetBSD?
The single Linux box we have in the Microsoft lab was severely hacked from
the outside, they have moved to FreeBSD, which is supposed to be safer (I
hope so).
Erik
Why not Linux?
Regards
Chris Saunders
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Halchin" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:49 PM
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
To Linux? :^)
Fr
A few comments on this (stuff after the line beneath):
The C implementation isn't really that inefficient. A factor of log(n)
in average of course a factor of n i worst case.
This doesn't change when using a lazy language! because of the nature of
quicksort.
As a matter of fact you have to
We're drifting a bit off Haskell here, but...
At 10:57 am +1000 4/8/00, Kevin Glynn wrote:
I don't believe this says anything about support for other OS's. I
think the devices here are hardware, (PCs, handhelds, phones, fridge
interfaces, ...) Of course Microsoft believes that some day, very
Why have any other computer when you can have a Mac?
Mine runs:
DVD Movies
MacOS
JVM
Playstation games
Windows 95
Windows 2000 (a bit slugglish)
and could run:
Linux (but I have no use for it at present)
I notice that your Mac
Why have any other computer when you can have a Mac?
Mine runs:
DVD Movies
MacOS
JVM
Playstation games
Windows 95
Windows 2000 (a bit slugglish)
and could run:
Linux (but I have no use for it at present)
I notice that
Eduardo Nahum Ochs wrote:
Why have any other computer when you can have a Mac?
Mine runs:
DVD Movies
MacOS
JVM
Playstation games
Windows 95
Windows 2000 (a bit slugglish)
and could run:
Linux (but I have no
Weird, nobody mentioned neither NetBSD nor OpenBSD...
CS people are weird. :-)
I consider myself a CS person and I run NetBSD on all my machines.
And I'm also weird.
I'm weird, but not a true 'CS' person. I run Linux -- do I
need to move to NetBSD?
-Brent
GOO is not a Microsoft invention, and nor is it part of Microsoft's
.NET stuff. GOO is an intermediate language that was, AFAIK, invented
by the Mondrian group. It might be described in the following paper:
Erik Meijer and Koen Claessen. The Design and Implementation of
Well Erik Fergus seem to be into a "my language/implementation" is
better than yours battle ;-) while some others are confused as to
what they're talking about. Not to prolong it, but let's see if I can
clarify a few issues (ROTW: I wrote the Mondrian - C# bit [and other
odds'n'endz])
At
"nigel" == Nigel Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
nigel Disclaimer, as Fergus added one: I am working with Microsoft on .NET
nigel implementation, but I run Windows 2000 on my G3 PowerBook and take it
nigel to Microsoft with me. I'm biased on everything :-)
Windows 2000 in a G3 Powerbook? I
On 03-Aug-2000, Nigel Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand that point, but if doing that means that you need to
implement the basic things like argument passing and procedure
calling yourself, using your own virtual machine, rather than
by using the underlying runtime's argument
Fergus wrote:
I guess one could argue that the costs of most other things pale
in comparison to the costs of having lazy evaluation as the default ;-)
Of course, if you're the sort of person who likes to write "head (sort lst)"
to get the least member of a list, then lazy evaluation is
Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:06:54 +0200, Nigel Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
More seriously as a number of languages are being produced to run
over .NET along with a whole slew of libraries it provides a good
platform to target your favourite research language at (for Windows
platforms at least).
Not "at least" but "only". I haven't heard of plans for .NET on any
non-Windows platform.
Then you should listen more closely! a quote from the .NET whitepaper:
Microsoft .NET proactively adapts to what you
want to do, on any of your devices. This inversion
of the traditional
nigel Disclaimer, as Fergus added one: I am working with Microsoft on
.NET
nigel implementation, but I run Windows 2000 on my G3 PowerBook and take
it
nigel to Microsoft with me. I'm biased on everything :-)
Windows 2000 in a G3 Powerbook? I am lost here :((
No, Nigel is not
Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:53:45 +0200, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
http://www.microsoft.com/net/
I still have not found anything suggesting that tools needed for
working with that (e.g. the common runtime) will be available for
non-Windows OSes. Who will make them? Microsoft?
--
__("
I agree.
Bill Halchin
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
Date: 3 Aug 2000 22:01:36 GMT
Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:53:45 +0200, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
http://www.microsoft.com/net/
I still have
I don't believe this says anything about support for other OS's. I
think the devices here are hardware, (PCs, handhelds, phones, fridge
interfaces, ...) Of course Microsoft believes that some day, very
soon, all devices will run (a version of) Windows. Hence this
statement refers to
: "Kevin Glynn" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
I don't believe this says anything about sup
To Linux? :^)
From: "Chris Saunders" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Erik Meijer" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: "Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk" [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Haskell and the NGWS Runtime
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk) wrote,
Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:53:45 +0200, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] pisze:
http://www.microsoft.com/net/
I still have not found anything suggesting that tools needed for
working with that (e.g. the common runtime) will be available for
Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
^^
Yes, that refers to the computer lab sponsored by MSR Cambridge
and MS Netherlands in Utrecht.
The plan is to have the release out the door by September 1st.
Will that release support Haskell, or just Mondrian?
The compiler
On 02-Aug-2000, Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The plan is to have the release out the door by September 1st.
Will that release support Haskell, or just Mondrian?
The compiler hooks into GHC by translating Core into GOO
and then after some source to source transformations it
On 02-Aug-2000, Carl R. Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fergus Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The compiler hooks into GHC by translating Core into GOO
and then after some source to source transformations it
can spit out either C# or Java.
Is there any publically available
Erik Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
^^
[someone wrote:]
Does anyone know where there is some information on Haskell integration
with the Microsoft NGWS runtime, which provides
cross language integration and a common system for memory managment,
library functions
90 matches
Mail list logo
