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

Re: MzScheme and SML



Michael Vanier wrote:


> A more interesting question is what he means by "semantic havoc".  Does
> anyone know of any work on incorporating macros into statically typed
> languages?  It doesn't sound like an intractable problem to me.

Clean has them.


=====


Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> 
> Ji-Yong D. Chung wrote:
> 
> >     Had I known about ML, perhaps I would have
> > implemented that instead,

> Too bad you hadn't heard of Fortran.  Of all the languages I have
> seen, it seems to be the one easiest to compile for serious speed.

Easiest? perhaps for subset, but the *whole* language is not so
easy to compile because of some imprecisions in design.
Did you really try to analyze the bedlam generated by EQUIVALENCE
and COMMON blocks in old glorious Fortran? In F90 you have dynamic
arrays...


Jerzy Karczmarczuk
Caen, France