Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They still live in Emacs. (Emacs Lisp's variables are dynamically scoped.)
OK. I tend to forget about this one, since I'm using it every day
(and use the macro "lexical-let" unless I am sure that no evil things
will happen).
Ralf
Doug Ransom wrote:
> I think you are mistakening ignorance for stupidity. It
> is true that C/C++ programmers like to write OO and few
> have any idea about functional programming, but very few
> will miss the ability to constantly shoot themselves in
> the foot with uninitalized random pointers
>
> If C# again makes it easy to write unsafe code, then in order
> to avoid the learning curve, many current C/C++ programmers
> are likely to continue programming in The Old Way. The trick
> lies in the learning curve.
>
I think you are mistakening ignorance for stupidity. It is true tha
Hi,
For DSP with Haskell, I remember having seen 2 years ago a presentation by
James Hook (Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology, Pacific
Software Research) on Hawk, which should be a Haskell derivative.
http://www.cse.ogi.edu/PacSoft/ should be a starting point
Hope it is releva
Hello,
I knew one relevant link for functional DSP:
http://users.snip.net/~donadio/mpd-hs-dsp.html
Kwanghoon
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Axel Jantsch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if anybody has ever tried to develop a good compiler for Haskell
> or any other functional language for a DSP processo
Hi,
I wonder if anybody has ever tried to develop a good compiler for Haskell
or any other functional language for a DSP processor?
There are no good C compilers for DSPs and much of DSP programming is still
done in assembler, due to the irregularity of DSP instruction sets and the
peculiarity
Ralf Muschall writes:
> > simplistic, binary distinction), then you have to decide where to draw the
> > line between "functional languages" and other languages that may, to some
>
> I think it became impossible to draw that line since the inventors
> and maintainers of dysfunctional langaug
> From: Ralf Muschall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 16 Aug 2000 21:46:44 +0200
> "Craig Dickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > simplistic, binary distinction), then you have to decide where to
> > draw the line between "functional languages" and other languages
> > that may, to some
>
> I think
