2009/10/13 Brian Harvey <[email protected]>: > Earlier I said >> It's so that clever compiler >> people can define an incomprehensible language that only they can use > > Bear has convinced me that "incomprehensible" wasn't very polite. I should > know better than to post in a hurry, and I apologize.
Forgiven. But frankly I find phasing pretty incomprehensible myself. > Of course what I really should have said is that /I/ have trouble > understanding this multi-phase view of Scheme programs... <snip> > I confess to still feeling that the simple-REPL model is /more beautiful/ than > the multi-phase model, and that therefore WG1 Scheme is going to end up more > beautiful than WG2 Scheme. But maybe you have to understand the latter to see > the beauty, like Beethoven and olives. Well I've been working on a type theory and eval framework for non-standard interpretation and some aspects of the discussion here w/rt macro-phasing and other modularity constructs sound *very* much like the material I am working with. There is an underlying graceful structure there, but I'm not sure we know how to illustrate it yet. david rush -- GPG Public key at http://cyber-rush.org/drr/gpg-public-key.txt _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
