[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: [Q] Dylan to Java/JVM compiler?
On 5/3/01 4:45 PM, Jeffrey Siegal, (jbs@quiotix.com), wrote:
> The whole idea in Dylan is to minimize the number of fully-general GF
> dispatches that need to be made through compile-time analysis.
As Jeffrey Siegal suggests, the Holy Grail of Dylan was to create a
language, runtime, and compiler that incorporated the best aspects of Common
Lisp/Scheme (dynamism - interacting with and/or modifying a running
application, generic functions, closures, macros) and go beyond them (OO
from the ground up - e.g., writing methods that specialize on individual
instances of built-in classes - not possible in CLOS, macros that are
hygenic - unlike Common Lisp macros), all while generating compiled code
that is as fast as the fastest statically compiled languages like C, or
Fortran.
If one creates a Dylan that targets a JVM, one just ends up with yet another
lisp-like language, but without the execution speed of even a good Common
Lisp compiler.
On a different tack, there's already a Dylan that compiles to byte code -
Mindy (Mindy Is Not Dylan Yet). Possibly one could look at that and see if
it could be retargeted to the JVM.
Raf
Raffael Cavallaro, Ph.D.
raffael@mediaone.net
Follow-Ups:
References: