[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: performance for scientific computing
In article <3b6a66cb$0$12227$4d4efb8e@news.be.uu.net>, "Sébastien de
Menten" <sdementen@hotmail.com> wrote:
> BUT, I just noted that GwydionDylan will *never* have macro ability (wow,
> they have just dropped one of the essential features as if it was a
> detail !!!).
You must have some misunderstanding. The Gwydion Dylan compiler "d2c"
fully supports Dylan macros.
> BTW, does anyone know why they did not write Gwydion Dylan in Lisp/Scheme
> instead of using a low-level language (C I think) ? These 3 languages are
> quite similar and the little differencies could have been soften with
> macros. I probably miss some point.
You surely must. The Gwydion "d2c" Dylan compiler is 99.9% written in
Dylan, a language which is far better for this purpose than Scheme or C
and at least arguably better than Lisp/CLOS.
Perhaps you are thinking of the Gwydion "Mindy", an interpreter written
in C which does not implement the full Dylan language and is used only
for bootstrapping the real compiler on new architectures.
-- Bruce
References: