[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Vectors as functions
From: "James McCartney" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Friday, August 15, 2003, at 12:29 PM, Joe Marshall wrote:
> > The biggest problem with first-class environments ala MIT Scheme
> > is the introduction of new bindings at runtime. If you introduce a
> > new binding, the `lexical address' (frame and offset) of a variable
> > cannot be statically determined and you have to do a deep search
> > every time. It absolutely destroys any sort of compiler optimization.
> Are programming language features only valuable that can be optimized?
> For some problems optimization might not be as important as
It depends. Sometimes I want to curtail expressivity because I need to
be able to reason about the code.
> > If you went a tad further and allowed *syntactic* binding in
> > first-class environments, you'd be truly hosed.
> I understand what is meant by dynamic and static binding. Or compile
> time or runtime lookup resolution. But what do you mean by "syntactic"?
First-class `macros' that you can re-define on the fly.