[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Var-free programming (slightly off-topic)
"DW" == Dan Weinreb <email@example.com> writes:
DW> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:52:29 -0500 (EST)
DW> From: Shriram Krishnamurthi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
DW> Lightweight languages rule.
DW> So, the big question that didn't actually get addressed at the LL
DW> conference: what is the criterion (or what are the criteria) for
DW> distinguishing between a "lightweight" language and other kinds of
DW> The one thing that's clear is that lightweight languages are good and
DW> non-lightweight languages are bad. Maybe that's the definition? :-)
DW> It's not clear to me that "having a read-eval-print loop" has
DW> something to do with the "weight" of a language. Or that having
DW> lexical scoping is a "weight" thing. I'm also not sure whether
DW> "weight" is more a property of the language definition in the abstract
DW> as opposed to a property of a particular implementation.
For example, the K&R reference manual for C  is 40 pages long. Does
that make (K&R) C "lightweight"?
Vladimir G. Ivanovic http://leonora.org/~vladimir
2770 Cowper St. email@example.com
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2447 +1 650 678 8014
 "The C Programming Language", B.W. Kenighan & D.M. Ritchie,
Prentice-Hall, 1978, pp. 179-219