> -----Original Message----- > From: Manuel M. T. Chakravarty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 4:35 AM > ... > > * While Sisal is arguably nice than Fortran, it doesn't > really provide a new killer feature - rewriting all this > Fortran code, just for getting nice programs is maybe not > enough of an incentive. But it DID offer an important new feature relative to the original Fortran programs it was trying to displace -- completely automatic parallelization for the Cray vector machines that were the main workhorses at Livermore and similar labs. Nikhil
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ George Russell
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ D. Tweed
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Jan Skibinski
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Bjorn Lisper
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Will Partain
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Bjorn Lisper
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Pieter Koopman
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
- RE: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ R.S. Nikhil
- RE: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ John Atwood
- Re: Cryptarithm solver - Haskell vs. C++ Fergus Henderson