[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to")

From: Charles Duffy
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to")
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:44:57 -0500

On Thu, 2004-07-01 at 08:43, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
> On Monday, June 28, 2004 at 9:55:09 PM, 
>     Tom Lord <address@hidden> wrote:
> >   At one end of a spectrum, it would be easy to write primitive furth
> >   commands to read one line of input, create a string value from that,
> >   and push it on the tuple stack.   It would be easy to add commands
> >   to compare that string to a regular expression, perhaps edit it, 
> >   and so forth.    Combined with very simple flow of control and a
> >   use-by-convention of $env as a "hold register", Furth would become
> >   a virtual machine for the programming language of "/bin/sed".
> Why exactly do you consider furth more suitable for such mini languages
> than the macro-system of scheme (or CL)?

Granted, I'm not Tom -- but my understanding is that the mini-languages
will be compiled via a subset of Pika (hence providing the
macro-language support and such) into Furth. Think of Furth as an
implementation detail that folks can expose (if they want to) to make
things (like alternate language bindings) easier.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]