"Page, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Gaby, | | On Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:40 PM you wrote: | | > ... | > Bill Page writes: | > | > | It is very very easy for the compiler to generate self- | > | identifying type constants either all the time or as a | > | compile-time option. This can even been done in a simple | > | pre-compilation step if necessary. | > | > Either we have a very different view of what "Reflection" | > is, or we have a very different experience in the use and | > implementations of that suff :-) | | That is quite possible. Care to give a couple of simple | examples we can continue to discuss?
Well, first it is you make the claims that it is "very very easy" to implement; I would say the burden of proof is upon you :-) However, my starting example is getting right the Figure 1 of the Template-Haskell paper. Can you provide a proof-of-concept as to why it is very very easy to do? | > I don't find Template Haskell implementation "very very | > very easy". Here is an overview of Template Haskell | > | > http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/Papers/meta-haskell/index.htm | > http://www.haskell.org/th/#papers | > | | I have read some of these papers (you've referred to them | before) and I am inclined to agree. I have not actually tried | to code in Template Haskell yet, but do not find this extension | of Haskell particularly "comfortable" yet. It's true isn't it | that some of the goals of meta-programming go beyond what one | would normally associate with language features that support | reflect? full-fledged meta-programming yes -- and Template Haskell is not there yet. But by "reflection" I imply the bare minimum currently provided by Template Haskell for example. | Perhaps the difference between Template Haskell and what seems | easy in Aldor (at least with respect to self-identification and | reflection) has to do with significant differences in the | underlying type system. I'm not so sure. Aldor's type system appears to me to be far more complicated and intricate than that of Haskell. Both share a good deal of functional core, though. | Aldor is set apart from Haskell for | historical reasons. Perhaps Aldor has more in common with ML? | Hmm, in what aspects? -- Gaby _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer