useful? links: http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~dyb/pubs/3imp.pdf http://clang.llvm.org/compatibility.html http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2013/ocw/system/presentations/1221/original/VLAIS.pdf http://events.linuxfoundation.org/slides/2011/lfcs/lfcs2011_llvm_lelbach.pdf http://www.biwascheme.org/
asm.js performance: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/asm-js-performance-improvements-in-the-latest-version-of-firefox-make-games-fly/ http://asmjs.org/faq.html On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Christophe Gragnic < christophegrag...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently embedding a «pedagogical pseudo-code like language» in > PicoLisp. > As using plain browsers is a nice thing to have in front of students, > I tried with > EmuLisp (PicoLisp in JS, by Jon Kleiser, that I won't thank enough, with > Alex), > which proved to be a good solution for me. > > So I had some thoughts, ideas and questions. > > 1) EmuLisp lacks some functions. The first idea I had was to write them in > the > available functions (like 'glue' with 'pack'). It worked for some, but > some others > needed to be implemented in JS. Now my question: how far could be pushed > the > idea to write a maximal subset of Picolisp in a minimal subset of > Picolisp? Like in > the original paper of McCarthy or «the Jewel» in SICP? I'm not talking > about > performance here, just functions availability. > > 2) Since PicoLisp64 is written in a «generic assembly» embedded in > PicoLisp, > I was wondering (only wondering, since the concepts are a bit vague for > me) if > instead of building the .s files we could build some http://asmjs.org/file(s). > > 3) Regarding EmuLisp again, and for your information, I've created > (and am using seriously!) a JS pil, that I named `piljs` which runs on node
