[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: HARLEQUIN DYLAN and C FFI
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Jason Trenouth wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 01:00:02 -0500 (EST), "Shawn" <shawn@anarchy-arts.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Douglas:
> >
> > Yes I thought that Harlequin Dylan would allow me to step away from
> > using C/C++ for my development (PC Games) but it seems to have floated off
> > into obscurity.
>
> That would be a shame because we're still here.
Jason,
I was under the impression that Harlequin Dylan was no more and that
the rights were sold to Functional Objects, Inc. Could you expand on your
statement a little? The Dylan situation is confusing (as well as tragic
:-() and since the FO web site isn't very informative it isn't surprising
that people suspect the worst.
> > I chanced acrossed Dolphin Smalltalk and was amazed at how
> > easy it appears to be. I need a language that can replace C/C++ but still
> > use the available SDK's out there for graphics and music, like FMOD. I am
> > currently looking at squeak now. Does Smalltalk come in like a bazillion
> > flavors ?
>
> I don't want to dis' Smalltalk since it will be better than C/C++ (as will
> Common Lisp, OCAML, or even Java).
It depends on the kinds of games and the kinds of processing that your
game programs are doing. I don't think dynamic languages can give you the
same small memory footprint or high performance as static languages. That
was supposed to be the point of the type declarations and sealing in
Dylan, right?
-- Brian
Follow-Ups:
References: