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

Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?

To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
From: Steve Dekorte <address@hidden>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:26:16 -0700
In-reply-to: <200306162304.h5GN4Cr29358@orchestra.cs.caltech.edu>
Sender: address@hidden

On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 04:04 PM, Michael Vanier wrote:
> ST ties you to a specific operational
> model (single dispatch OO); lisp doesn't.  It's pretty trivial to 
> implement
> ST-style OO in lisp; how easy is it to implement lisp in ST?

It's also probably easier to implement Smalltalk style in Perl than 
vice versa. Would this be an endorsement of Perl? (Or Smalltalk?)

Cheers,
Steve
Io, a small language: http://www.iolanguage.com/

References:
- Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
  - From: Michael Vanier <mvanier@cs.caltech.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Next by Date: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Previous by thread: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Next by thread: Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread