root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| BOOT requires that you insert a translation step into every
| file you process which causes you to require ADDITIONAL stanzas in
| the makefiles.
in the various incarnations of my local version interp, converting
from Boot to Lisp is handled by a generic rule:
.PRECIOUS: %.boot
.PRECIOUS: %.clisp
%.clisp: %.boot
$(BOOT_TO_LISP)
[...]
| Boot inserts the translation step between you and the lisp top-level
| loop, making debugging "one step removed".
Well, I have no need to debug at the lisp level. :-)
| Boot is written in boot.
I'm sure many Lisp implementations are written in Lisp.
| Which means that if you change it you
| have to re-translate the lisp code used to bootstrap it and re-insert
| it into the files (see btincl2.boot for instance).
This has not proven be a problem to me. If you look at the
build-improvements, you'll notice that it now has a full-three stage
bootstrapping for Boot -- the only thing we don't do at the moment is
to compare the generated lisp.
[...]
| Boot constructs translate into inefficient, time and space poor
| list-based code constructs.
yes, but that is not an inherent inefficiency
[...]
| We will have to again
| automate the check to ensure that we don't quietly break the world.
Anything that can be automated should be.
| This isn't apparent (yet) because no-one codes in boot.
but, wait for a week or so :-)
[...]
| Make it into a real, documented, standalone language or kill it.
I believe we all agree that noone wants an undocumented language that
runs forever. This holds for Boot, SPAD, etc.
-- Gaby
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
