Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> A long time ago, `OutputForm' tend to be called `Expression', e.g.
> equivalent to SExpression, until the difference was fully realized. If you
> browse the Spad compiler source code, you should still find vestiges
> of that.
>
> I must confess I don't know to what extent your plan diverges from or
> converge to my plan -- a year ago -- to have a virtual machine for
> Spad (my slides are still on the web). But, it is interesting that I
> saw all those problems you're discussing and concluded that it was
> time to abandon Lisp as the virtual machine one compiles Spad to.
>
I must admit that I do not understand what you really mean. Do
you mean that at conceptual level we should use different abstract
machine? Or maybe you mean literally re-targeting Spad compiler?
I would say that at conceptual level I abandoned Lisp long ago
(or rather Lisp was never my conceptual model) -- I am not sure
if my model is clear enough to present to others, but it is
definitely different from Lisp. At coding level I am trying
to reduce/localize dependence on Lisp, but there is still
substantial work to do -- ATM dropping Lisp is not practical.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
open-axiom-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
