[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc.
From: |
Colin Walters |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc. |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:13:44 -0400 |
On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 17:55 -0700, Tom Lord wrote:
> So, A is an example of a language in use because A has not been
> implemented but B is _not_ an example of a language in use because
> B _has_ been implemented?
It has nothing to do with being a language or not. It has to do with
being a counterexample for the creation of an entirely new language.
> But all those rules for different header fields --- only a few of them
> have been implemented! Since the others have not yet been
> implemented, using your logic, you are proposing implementing a new
> language!
Not at all! Because for the uses given, simple string key/value pairs
work quite well. So there is no deviation in form from the existing
patch log format. Parsers can easily ignore unknown fields.
> WL looks to me like a half-done job. To finish the job, something
> like xl is needed.
But the point is that xl is for the most part a massively over-
engineered solution to a non-problem. For the rest of the use cases,
it's far better to have an actual programming language with real
libraries and features that you can use to implement project-specific
procedures.
> Why? That's a very glib statement. I've demonstrated some uses
> already and more will surely follow.
And I've demonstrated those uses are more easily solved using existing
methods.
> > A client can perform whatever computation they want on the data.
>
> Why can't the data itself represent, unambiguously, a program, albeit
> a very limited program (so that we can terminate in finite steps)?
>
> What is this essential difference that you see between code and data?
The difference is turing-completeness, of course. If xl is not turing-
complete, then we can stop discussing that.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., James Blackwell, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Jeremy Shaw, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Jeremy Shaw, 2004/07/20
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Colin Walters, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc.,
Colin Walters <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Phil Frost, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Jan Hudec, 2004/07/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/21
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] new language, arch, furth, etc., Matthieu MOY, 2004/07/21
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: new language, arch, furth, etc., Tom Lord, 2004/07/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: new language, arch, furth, etc., Zenaan Harkness, 2004/07/21
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: new language, arch, furth, etc., Miles Bader, 2004/07/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: new language, arch, furth, etc., Mikhael Goikhman, 2004/07/21