I actually sent that email prematurely last night, hence it ended with a
colon.
I said that Boot's pattern matching allowed us to get by without structured
data for the whole project.  I meant to follow that up, with "but that's not
a good thing."  The interpreter exposes it's internal representation in a
very bad way.  If you want to change the data structures the interpreter
uses, you need to find all the places in the code which use pattern matching
to destruct data, and change them.  I did this several times and it is no
fun at all.

Any modern language uses structured data to hide those sorts of
implementation details.  Tim's project to rewrite the system in CL is a very
good thing if he replaces Boot pattern matching with structured data.  The
important issue is hiding implementation details.  To me the language used
is secondary.  If Tim wants to use CL, that's fine with me.  If other
projects do the same thing with Boot, that would be good too.

Tim's point about the heavy use of global variables in Boot is a valid
point.  That makes the code hard to understand and change.  But to me that's
not a language issue, but an implementation choice.  Any good rewrite of the
interpreter would remove those.  That could be done in Boot or CL.  If Tim
likes CL, and he does that work to add structured data, I think Axiom would
be much easier to maintain.

-- Scott

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:37 AM, root <d...@axiom-developer.org> wrote:

> > As Dick Jenks explained it to me when I joined the Axiom project in 1984,
>
> Back in the late 80s I set out to remove boot from Axiom.
> It is a clearly stated goal of the Axiom project.
> It is happening as I write this.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer

Reply via email to