[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Are there any .NET possibilities/implications for Dylan/Functional Developer?
In article <t4d1jtgi5vc3hh1ckh1p7uls87vntmnek0@4ax.com>,
Jason Trenouth <jason.trenouth@globalgraphics.com> wrote:
>Dylan is arguably:
>
> Scheme-ish semantics ( single namespace, some conventions )
> Common Lisp-ish object system ( generic functions, MI, etc )
> Pascal-ish syntax ( infix, begin/end )
> Smalltalk-ish philosophy ( OOP all the way )
Isn't this likely to make it difficult to do a .NET version of Dylan?
There was a recent thread in comp.lang.lisp about a .NET version of Common
Lisp. I didn't read it all, but the concensus seemed to be that Lisp's
semantics don't map well onto .NET. So while you could do the port, you'd
either have to leave things out or it will be horribly inefficient. I'd
expect the same thing for Dylan.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
Follow-Ups:
References: