By the way, I made a mistake in my previous message: it's System F omega that was used, not System F. On 2003-11-17T22:29:03-0800, Steve Dekorte wrote: > I assumed it was obvious that I wasn't questioning whether two Turing > complete languages where capable of the same computation. That was obvious, yes... > I bet we can make a good guess by asking a few people that haven't seen > F, Haskell or Io before. Personally, I can't make any sense out of the > above. How does "id" let you set the target of the generic proxy? You can set the target using "const". > Are you sure you aren't confusing a generic type with a proxy? Perhaps, but it seems difficult given that I don't know what you mean by a "generic type". > >But perhaps you meant to compare not just the code that we have chosen > >to written down, but also the language implementation > I'm just interested in the code. Then wouldn't a programming language with proxying built-in be most attractive? Would you agree that Io would be a better programming language with proxying built-in? Ken -- Edit this signature at http://www.digitas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/ken/sig http://www.lp.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature