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

Re: dual-language systems increase modularity

By the way, I made a mistake in my previous message: it's System F omega
that was used, not System F.

On 2003-11-17T22:29:03-0800, Steve Dekorte wrote:
> I assumed it was obvious that I wasn't questioning whether two Turing 
> complete languages where capable of the same computation.

That was obvious, yes...

> I bet we can make a good guess by asking a few people that haven't seen 
> F, Haskell or Io before. Personally, I can't make any sense out of the 
> above. How does "id" let you set the target of the generic proxy?

You can set the target using "const".

> Are you sure you aren't confusing a generic type with a proxy?

Perhaps, but it seems difficult given that I don't know what you mean by
a "generic type".

> >But perhaps you meant to compare not just the code that we have chosen
> >to written down, but also the language implementation
> I'm just interested in the code.

Then wouldn't a programming language with proxying built-in be most
attractive?  Would you agree that Io would be a better programming
language with proxying built-in?


Edit this signature at http://www.digitas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/ken/sig

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature