(Yet another) naive question 
Author Message
 (Yet another) naive question

I was wondering if people had considered tackling the differentiation of
compilation and interpretation semantics through the use of wordlists.

For instance, the version of '+' in the interpret wordlist would add the top
elements of the stack
The version of '+' in the compile wordlist would add a call to the interpret
wordlist's '+' to the current definition.

The interpreter itself would have no concept of 'state'. All words would be
executed immediately. The only distinction between compilation and
interpretation would be the current search wordlist.

Has this been done before? Was it a bad idea?

Giles.



Mon, 06 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 (Yet another) naive question

Quote:

>I was wondering if people had considered tackling the differentiation of
>compilation and interpretation semantics through the use of wordlists.
>For instance, the version of '+' in the interpret wordlist would add the top
>elements of the stack
>The version of '+' in the compile wordlist would add a call to the interpret
>wordlist's '+' to the current definition.
>The interpreter itself would have no concept of 'state'. All words would be
>executed immediately. The only distinction between compilation and
>interpretation would be the current search wordlist.
>Has this been done before? Was it a bad idea?

It's been done.  It's been debated at length.  I personally think it isn't
at all a bad idea, but it's very hard to use it with standard code and also
use the standard wordlist words, unless you're very careful.


Thu, 09 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 (Yet another) naive question
On Sun, 21 Feb 1999 19:05:42 GMT, Jonah Thomas

Quote:

>It's been done.  It's been debated at length.  I personally think it isn't
>at all a bad idea, but it's very hard to use it with standard code and also
>use the standard wordlist words, unless you're very careful.

        I think that's probably right.  Wordlists and
interpreter/compiler lists should be orthogonal, instead of trying to
overload one on the other.

(
----------
Virtually,

Bruce McFarling, Newcastle,

)



Fri, 10 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 4 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. naive type checking II (not so naive?)

2. Questions from a naive user

3. Questions from a naive st programmer

4. Naive Forth questions

5. Extremely naive (and probably stupid) question

6. Naive question

7. Naive question

8. Another naive question

9. Naive Number Question

10. Naive Number Question

11. Naive newbie question.

12. Naive Dylan question

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software