Info Dylan Digest V1 #191 
Author Message
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191

 > Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 21:01:57 +0100

Quote:

> Subject: Language Design Status

> But: May Apple in their wisedom decide not to remove the read method
> for pairs from the Dylan specification.

Actually, read has never been part of the Dylan specification, so questions
of wisdom aside, we won't be removing it :-)

While 'read' is useful for people creating programming environments,
we considered it less useful for people writing end-user applications.
The latter were our target audience for Dylan.

  -Andrew



Sat, 08 Jun 1996 23:13:13 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191
   Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 10:13:13 -0500

   > But: May Apple in their wisedom decide not to remove the read method
   > for pairs from the Dylan specification.

   Actually, read has never been part of the Dylan specification, so questions
   of wisdom aside, we won't be removing it :-)

Seems that I made some false assumptions.

   While 'read' is useful for people creating programming environments,
   we considered it less useful for people writing end-user applications.
   The latter were our target audience for Dylan.

Is that right? Won't general saving and loading of lists or other
objects be supported? Do you want to send all those developers that
depend on external representations of objects into the desert?

Otherwise, is it imaginable that behind a curtain of an Algol-like
syntax the internal representation of Dylan as lists (am I right in
that assumption at all?) as described in the "Dylan" book might change
one day? I don't mean the actual subclass of sequence that is used
but the way such Algol-like constructs are mapped onto sequences
syntactically.

If not, my suggestion: Make the lisp hackers happy by providing 'read'
for pairs.

  Dolfi



Sun, 09 Jun 1996 00:35:44 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191

Quote:

>    While 'read' is useful for people creating programming environments,
>    we considered it less useful for people writing end-user applications.
>    The latter were our target audience for Dylan.

> Is that right? Won't general saving and loading of lists or other
> objects be supported? Do you want to send all those developers that
> depend on external representations of objects into the desert?

No, I'd rather send them to a real persistent object system.

Quote:
> Otherwise, is it imaginable that behind a curtain of an Algol-like
> syntax the internal representation of Dylan as lists (am I right in
> that assumption at all?) as described in the "Dylan" book might change
> one day? I don't mean the actual subclass of sequence that is used
> but the way such Algol-like constructs are mapped onto sequences
> syntactically.

I'm not sure I understand this.  If you're asking whether the algol
syntax will be parsed into symbols and pairs which will then be fed
to the compiler, my answer is that the issue is an implementation detail,
and not a function of the language standard, but that I would be very
surprised if an implementation took that route.  (Anyone who's tried to
implement a hygenic macro system knows that symbols and pairs aren't
a very good internal representation.)

Quote:
> If not, my suggestion: Make the lisp hackers happy by providing 'read'
> for pairs.

Suggestion noted.


Sun, 09 Jun 1996 07:11:30 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191


Quote:


> >    While 'read' is useful for people creating programming environments,
> >    we considered it less useful for people writing end-user applications.
> >    The latter were our target audience for Dylan.

> > Is that right? Won't general saving and loading of lists or other
> > objects be supported? Do you want to send all those developers that
> > depend on external representations of objects into the desert?

> No, I'd rather send them to a real persistent object system.

Isn't there a problem when you want to transfer objects from
one system to another? A standard syntax for representing objects
as ASCII text (for example - it needn't be ASCII) saves the
programmer from doing a lot of the work. This IMHO is a feature
worth keeping.

Martin Rodgers

--- {*filter*} Surfing on CIX ---



Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:10:16 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191
   Newsgroups: comp.lang.dylan
   Path: news.cambridge.apple.com!news.media.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!cix.compulink.co.uk!{*filter*}_surfer

   Organization: What organization?
   X-Newsreader: EMpathy

   Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 07:10:16 GMT
   Lines: 25





   > >
   > >    While 'read' is useful for people creating programming environments,
   > >    we considered it less useful for people writing end-user applications.
   > >    The latter were our target audience for Dylan.
   > >
   > > Is that right? Won't general saving and loading of lists or other
   > > objects be supported? Do you want to send all those developers that
   > > depend on external representations of objects into the desert?
   >
   > No, I'd rather send them to a real persistent object system.

   Isn't there a problem when you want to transfer objects from
   one system to another? A standard syntax for representing objects
   as ASCII text (for example - it needn't be ASCII) saves the
   programmer from doing a lot of the work. This IMHO is a feature
   worth keeping.

I thought the point is that I/O and file handling are not to be a part
of the Dylan language, proper, because Dylan is to live in a variety
of environments, across which one definition of these facilities would
not suffice.

--

Mitron Corporation    (503) 690-8350    FAX: (503) 690-9292
15256 NW Greenbrier Pkwy, Beaverton, OR 97006



Mon, 10 Jun 1996 22:14:04 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191

Quote:
> A standard syntax for representing objects
> as ASCII text

This is what SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language, ISO 8879) is for.


Tue, 11 Jun 1996 07:38:53 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191


   I thought the point is that I/O and file handling are not to be a part
   of the Dylan language, proper, because Dylan is to live in a variety
   of environments, across which one definition of these facilities would
   not suffice.

This strikes me as a mistake.  It should at least be possible to write
portable programs over a set of standard platforms supporting normal
file systems.  Are the Dylan designers going to specify a portable but
perhaps optional I/O library?

-- Harley Davis
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nom: Harley Davis                       ILOG S.A.

tel: (33 1) 46 63 66 66                 94253 Gentilly Cedex, France



Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:14:09 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191

Quote:

> I thought the point is that I/O and file handling are not to be a part
> of the Dylan language, proper, because Dylan is to live in a variety
> of environments, across which one definition of these facilities would
> not suffice.

I don't know anything about that, as I've yet to receive a Dylan
manual. I can't see how I/O can't be part of a language, as that
would make Dylan as useful as ISO Pascal. Some apps are nothing
but I/O, which would mean you're saying they can't be written in
a standard part of the Dylan language? Yuch. It sounds a lot like
Pascal, which I gave up so that I could write more portable code.

Martin Rodgers

--- {*filter*} Surfing on CIX ---



Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:11:37 GMT  
 Info Dylan Digest V1 #191

Quote:

> > A standard syntax for representing objects
> > as ASCII text

> This is what SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language, ISO 8879) is for.

Which languages have support for SGML as a standard feature? Does
any such language run under Microsoft Windows?

Martin Rodgers

--- {*filter*} Surfing on CIX ---



Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:11:39 GMT  
 
 [ 10 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Info Dylan Digest Digest V1 #127

2. Info Dylan Digest Digest V1 #114

3. Info Dylan Digest Digest V1 #122

4. Info Dylan Digest Digest V1 #84

5. cw-talk-digest Digest V97 #191

6. info-dylan-digest V1 #24

7. Info Dylan Digest V1 #177

8. Info Dylan Digest V1 #149

9. Info Dylan Digest V1 #147

10. Digest Number 191

11. Info Dylan Digest V2 #43

12. Info Dylan digest V2 #682

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software