On 21/11/2009 7:44 PM, Guillaume Yziquel wrote:
Duncan Murdoch a écrit :
I believe I should. I'd like the OCaml / R binding to be closely knit
to R internals. One reason would be for speed, the other being that
I'd like to make use of camlp4 to write syntax extensions to mix OCaml
and R syntax. It's therefore important for me not to rely on the R
interpreter to be active when building R values. Or when marshaling R
values via OCaml. There are numerous other issues aside this one.
You are probably not going to be able to do that. Take your example of
the promise below: to evaluate a promise, you need to evaluate the
expression attached to it in the R interpreter. (This is discussed in
the R Language Definition.)
You can put probably put together simple R objects like integer arrays
without having R running, but anything substantial isn't going to be
feasible.
Duncan Murdoch
That's precisely the issue. I want to map a functional language to a
functional language. And keep the same evaluation semantics. I do not
(yet?) see why it should not be feasible.
R is a fairly quirky and irregular language, with lots of functions
implemented in C code, so you haven't taken on a small project. But I
wish you luck.
Duncan Murdoch
If this is done properly, OCaml could then compile R code natively. That
would be really nice. There would be other advantages in integrating the
two languages cleanly.
So, taking the example of promises, I need to map it to its OCaml
semantic equivalent, which seems to be a Lazy.t structure. That doesn't
seem (yet) unfeasible.
Thank you for your pointer to the R Language Definition. Starting by R
Internals was perhaps a bit brutal.
All the best,
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
