| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Chris M. Thomasson
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:23 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
 |
|
"Skybuck Flying" <BloodyShame@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:33595$48ee17cd$541981e1$6749@cache5.tilbu1.nb.home.nl...
| Quote: | thomas.mertes@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
The future programming language (does it already exist?  )
Yes
Just yes ?
I am not convinced.
|
[...]
Why not? Ever heard anything about all the existing reflection and advanced
self-modifying code techniques? |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Jim P
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:23 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
<snip>
| Quote: | Or in Common Lisp, what are called compiler macros:
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/03_bba.htm
3.2.2.1 Compiler Macros
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/03_bbaa.htm
3.2.2.1.1 Purpose of Compiler Macros
These are macros that "wrap" calls to already-existing functions
or macros to provide an opportunity to customize the code (or even
replace it entirely) at compile time based on the actual signature
of the call instance and/or the compilation environment.
Rob, I think Skybuck was asking for code that could be changed at |
run-time - - - Function can be changed by the code - - - while the code
is running - - - that is at runtime - - not compile time.
and code that would run functions that have not been defined
or work with variables that are not defined - -
and can mix variables of any type - - and the compiler would know what
you wanted and magically at the same time know what you do not want to do.
Jim P |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rob Warnock
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:48 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
Jim P <Jim_P@mad.scientist.com> wrote:
+---------------
| > Or in Common Lisp, what are called compiler macros: ...
|
| Rob, I think Skybuck was asking for code that could be changed at
| run-time - - - Function can be changed by the code - - - while the code
| is running - - - that is at runtime - - not compile time.
+---------------
Oh, o.k. But Lisp can do that too, of course:
| Quote: | (defun foo (x) (+ 3 x))
|
FOO
15
| Quote: | (setf (symbol-function 'foo) (lambda (y) (* y 17)))
|
#<Interpreted Function (LAMBDA (Y) (* Y 17)) {489465D1}>
204
And the same thing works for compiled functions:
| Quote: | (defun foo (x) (+ 4 x))
|
FOO
| Quote: | (compile 'foo)
; Compiling LAMBDA (X): |
; Compiling Top-Level Form:
FOO
NIL
NIL
#<Function FOO {4895ADB1}>
9
| Quote: | (setf (symbol-function 'foo)
(compile nil (lambda (x) (* 5 x)))) |
; Compiling LAMBDA (X):
; Compiling Top-Level Form:
#<Function "LAMBDA (X)" {489807A1}>
#<Function "LAMBDA (X)" {489807A1}>
25
+---------------
| and code that would run functions that have not been defined
| or work with variables that are not defined - -
+---------------
Well, if by "run" you mean drop into the debugger and let you fix it up
so that it can run without exiting the program, then, yes, that, too:
Error in KERNEL:%COERCE-TO-FUNCTION: the function BAR is undefined.
[Condition of type UNDEFINED-FUNCTION]
Restarts:
0: [ABORT] Return to Top-Level.
Debug (type H for help)
0] (defun bar (x) (expt 2 x))
BAR
0] (bar 14)
16384
0] q
16384
and for variables:
Error in KERNEL::UNBOUND-SYMBOL-ERROR-HANDLER: the variable FOO is unbound.
[Condition of type UNBOUND-VARIABLE]
Restarts:
0: [ABORT] Return to Top-Level.
Debug (type H for help)
0] (defvar foo 27)
FOO
0] (+ foo 12)
39
0] q
39
27
But this is really old, *OLD* stuff!! 1960's already.
+---------------
| and can mix variables of any type - - and the compiler would
| know what you wanted and magically at the same time know what
| you do not want to do.
+---------------
Are you looking for a Super-DWIM?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DWIM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Teitelman
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/D/DWIM.html
...
1. adj. Able to guess, sometimes even correctly, the result
intended when bogus input was provided.
2. n. obs. The BBNLISP/INTERLISP function that attempted to
accomplish this feat by correcting many of the more common errors.
...
Warren Teitelman originally wrote DWIM to fix his typos and
spelling errors, so it was somewhat idiosyncratic to his style,
and would often make hash of anyone else's typos if they were
stylistically different. ...
Also see section "2.3 Interlisp" of:
http://www.dreamsongs.com/Files/HOPL2-Uncut.pdf
The Evolution of Lisp
Guy L. Steele, Jr., and Richard P. Gabriel (HOPL 1992)
which references:
Teitelman, Warren.
"PILOT: A Step toward Man-Computer Symbiosis."
Technical Report MAC-TR-32, MIT Project MAC,
September 1966. Ph.D. thesis.
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <rpw3@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
David Kerber
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
In article <315142e8-6682-40ff-b85e-134071f77e79
@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, thomas.mertes@gmx.at says...
| Quote: | With classic programming model this is much more difficult... the
compiler
simply stops where it encounters to first problem where it cannot go
on...
Not all compilers work this way.
Name one compiler which does work this way just for kicks ;)
E.g.: Some Pascal compilers: Pascal 6000 and P4.
|
And many java compilers as well.
--
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML
/ \ Email!
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible). |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ken Hagan
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 1:50 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 06:38:56 +0100, Skybuck Flying
<BloodyShame@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I myself have seen some trends towards such a future programming
language.
|
Already mentioned are Lisp and anything-open-source. I would add
assembly language. I wouldn't say it was "common", but it is quite
easy to find mainstream examples of (very small amounts of) code
being generated at run-time to solve what would otherwise be a
performance problem. (In Windows, GDI uses (or used) the technique
for raster operations and ATL uses the technique for sub-classing.)
You might care to reflect on the fact that all three were common
half a century ago and have spent most of the intervening years
falling out of common use, in favour of languages that constrain
the programmer.
What you are asking for is not so much a gun, but a nuclear cannon.
It's a heavy beast and unless you are very strong you'll have trouble
holding it up, so in all probability it will point at your feet. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jim P
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
Ken Hagan wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 06:38:56 +0100, Skybuck Flying
BloodyShame@hotmail.com> wrote:
I myself have seen some trends towards such a future programming
language.
Already mentioned are Lisp and anything-open-source. I would add
assembly language. I wouldn't say it was "common", but it is quite
easy to find mainstream examples of (very small amounts of) code
being generated at run-time to solve what would otherwise be a
performance problem. (In Windows, GDI uses (or used) the technique
for raster operations and ATL uses the technique for sub-classing.)
You might care to reflect on the fact that all three were common
half a century ago and have spent most of the intervening years
falling out of common use, in favour of languages that constrain
the programmer.
What you are asking for is not so much a gun, but a nuclear cannon.
It's a heavy beast and unless you are very strong you'll have trouble
holding it up, so in all probability it will point at your feet.
|
and you expect Skybuck to understand that concept of shooting your own foot? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Tony
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
<thomas.mertes@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Code reuse ist done best with (open) source code licensed
under the GPL or some other open source license.
|
Propaganda alert! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 7:20 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
On 27 Nov., 01:36, "Tony" <t...@my.net> wrote:
| Quote: | thomas.mer...@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Code reuse ist done best with (open) source code licensed
under the GPL or some other open source license.
Propaganda alert!
|
You probably reuse code of proprietory closed source programs
like M$ Office...
Greetings Thomas Mertes
Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
Seed7 - The extensible programming language: User defined statements
and operators, abstract data types, templates without special
syntax, OO with interfaces and multiple dispatch, statically typed,
interpreted or compiled, portable, runs under linux/unix/windows. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Nick Keighley
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:15 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
On Nov 27, 7:20 am, thomas.mer...@gmx.at wrote:
| Quote: | On 27 Nov., 01:36, "Tony" <t...@my.net> wrote:
thomas.mer...@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com....
On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Code reuse ist done best with (open) source code licensed
under the GPL or some other open source license.
Propaganda alert!
You probably reuse code of proprietory closed source programs
like M$ Office...
|
the Win32 interface is proprietory closed source
most of the big DBMS many software tools etc.
You can reuse code which uses these.
You can reuse other bits of your own code. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 9:11 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
On 27 Nov., 14:15, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Nov 27, 7:20 am, thomas.mer...@gmx.at wrote:
On 27 Nov., 01:36, "Tony" <t...@my.net> wrote:
thomas.mer...@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com....
On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Code reuse ist done best with (open) source code licensed
under the GPL or some other open source license.
Propaganda alert!
You probably reuse code of proprietory closed source programs
like M$ Office...
the Win32 interface is proprietory closed source
most of the big DBMS many software tools etc.
You can reuse code which uses these.
|
Yes, but this is only possible when the code you want to
reuse is released with a license that allowes the reuse.
E.g.: With the GPL or some other open source license.
Note: Not every released source code can be used
legally in your own programs. It is necessary that the
license allows you to do so.
| Quote: | You can reuse other bits of your own code.
|
Great! You can reuse your own code.
Greetings Thomas Mertes
Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
Seed7 - The extensible programming language: User defined statements
and operators, abstract data types, templates without special
syntax, OO with interfaces and multiple dispatch, statically typed,
interpreted or compiled, portable, runs under linux/unix/windows. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Gerry Quinn
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
In article <79c138b1-b564-4537-88f9-
95737681f69e@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, thomas.mertes@gmx.at says...
| Quote: | On 27 Nov., 01:36, "Tony" <t...@my.net> wrote:
thomas.mer...@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Code reuse ist done best with (open) source code licensed
under the GPL or some other open source license.
Propaganda alert!
You probably reuse code of proprietory closed source programs
like M$ Office...
|
MS do.
Anyway, a lot of open source stuff is contaminated with viral licences
ands unusuable for most purposes except breeding more open source stuff.
- Gerry Quinn |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:57 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
On 28 Nov., 17:05, Gerry Quinn <ger...@indigo.ie> wrote:
| Quote: | In article <79c138b1-b564-4537-88f9-
95737681f...@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, thomas.mer...@gmx.at says...
On 27 Nov., 01:36, "Tony" <t...@my.net> wrote:
thomas.mer...@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:c7b39115-49fa-484f-8c1e-bffe5b2c8b99@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 8 Okt., 07:38, "Skybuck Flying" <BloodySh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Code reuse ist done best with (open) source code licensed
under the GPL or some other open source license.
Propaganda alert!
You probably reuse code of proprietory closed source programs
like M$ Office...
MS do.
Anyway, a lot of open source stuff is contaminated with viral licences
ands unusuable for most purposes except breeding more open source stuff.
|
With which license do you release your software to the
general public?
Greetings Thomas Mertes
Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
Seed7 - The extensible programming language: User defined statements
and operators, abstract data types, templates without special
syntax, OO with interfaces and multiple dispatch, statically typed,
interpreted or compiled, portable, runs under linux/unix/windows. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Gerry Quinn
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 7:41 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
In article <2a8ba3f2-41fe-420b-bffe-9062862f9770
@d23g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, thomas.mertes@gmx.at says...
| Quote: | On 28 Nov., 17:05, Gerry Quinn <ger...@indigo.ie> wrote:
In article <79c138b1-b564-4537-88f9-
Anyway, a lot of open source stuff is contaminated with viral licences
ands unusuable for most purposes except breeding more open source stuff.
With which license do you release your software to the
general public?
|
When I release open source (not often) I attach a licence that says it
may be used for any purpose.
The only restriction I impose is that a copyright notice is to be
retained on any distributions of the source or modified versions of the
source. Nobody is obliged to redistribute the source, though.
- Gerry Quinn |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guy Macon
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:30 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
Gerry Quinn wrote:
| Quote: |
thomas.mertes@gmx.at says...
With which license do you release your software to the
general public?
When I release open source (not often) I attach a licence that says it
may be used for any purpose.
The only restriction I impose is that a copyright notice is to be
retained on any distributions of the source or modified versions of the
source. Nobody is obliged to redistribute the source, though.
|
A license you wrote yourself, or one of the standard Open Source or
Creative Commons licenses?
If you wrote it yourself, can someone chance one byte, call it a
derivative work, and copyright the result under their own name?
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 9:25 am Post subject: Re: The future programming language (does it already exist ? |
|
|
On 8 Dec, 05:13, Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote:
| Quote: | Gerry Quinn wrote:
thomas.mer...@gmx.at says...
With which license do you release your software to the
general public?
When I release open source (not often) I attach a licence that says it
may be used for any purpose.
The only restriction I impose is that a copyright notice is to be
retained on any distributions of the source or modified versions of the
source. Nobody is obliged to redistribute the source, though.
A license you wrote yourself, or one of the standard Open Source or
Creative Commons licenses?
If you wrote it yourself, can someone chance one byte, call it a
derivative work, and copyright the result under their own name?
|
I suspect that steps outside the "fair use" provisions.
If I take a best selling book change one letter and
publish it under my own name would I expect to have
legal problems? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
