[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp
From: |
Konrad Hinsen |
Subject: |
Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp |
Date: |
Fri, 07 Jun 2019 15:48:09 +0200 |
Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
> (They could have chosen Guile instead of a custom Lisp, but that’s an
> “implementation detail”. :-))
>From my reading of the whitepaper, no. They have pretty strict
constraints on their language because they send live code updates
to running instances and want to be able to make certain guarantees.
Guile, or any other Scheme, would be too flexible.
Konrad.
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Konrad Hinsen, 2019/06/03
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Pronaip, 2019/06/03
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Konrad Hinsen, 2019/06/03
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/06/06
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Konrad Hinsen, 2019/06/06
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Pierre Neidhardt, 2019/06/06
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Konrad Hinsen, 2019/06/06
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Ludovic Courtès, 2019/06/07
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp,
Konrad Hinsen <=
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Ludovic Courtès, 2019/06/07
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Ludovic Courtès, 2019/06/07
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, Konrad Hinsen, 2019/06/07
- Re: Lightning talk at IPFS camp, ng0, 2019/06/13