[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Forking stables. was Re: language translator help

From: Bill Gribble
Subject: Re: Forking stables. was Re: language translator help
Date: 17 Jun 2002 18:35:26 -0500

On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 17:37, Neil Jerram wrote:
> Er... not a lot.  It's a great article, but I noticed nothing in
> particular on these subjects.  Rather, it's all about designing a
> language so that the community can help grow it, and in particular
> about why he thinks that Java needs overloaded operators.

Java *does* need overloaded operators... 

if it's got even half a chance of overtaking c++ as the most bletcherous
abortion of a half-specified "oops, um, well actually what we REALLY
meant was" of a language ever. 

ba dump <ching> 


who just today got a very hearty belly laugh out of this: there's no way
to determine at compile time or run time if a particular g++-compiled
library was compiled with either RTTI or exception support, so you can't
actually distribute *any* program that depends on 3rd party c++
libraries and expect it to work unless it's statically linked and
includes the complete source to all 3rd party libs in its own source
tree, so it can make sure they get built with the same RTTI/exception
conventions... but of course templates' "generic programming" model
makes shared libraries, um, "obsolete" anyway...

> (Oh, perhaps that was your point ...?)
>         Neil
> _______________________________________________
> Guile-user mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

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