... ridiculous is the original premise of this thread, that somehow dynamic typing is an obsolete technology supersceded by static typing. Really? The subject is still "shootout: implementing an interpreter for a simple procedural language Minim". Regards -- Markus

...the opponenent in question knows how to build simple interpreters on top of his/her languages. ...something like (eval (read)) in your statically typed language. You can only implement an interpreter for (a subset of) Common Lisp (or a language with similar features) ... bit what the underlying language is like that implements interpreter in question. It only needs to be...

...the opponenent in question knows how to build simple interpreters on top of his/her languages. ...something like (eval (read)) in your statically typed language. You can only implement an interpreter for (a subset of) Common Lisp (or a language with similar features) ...single bit what the underlying language is like that implements interpreter in question. It only needs to be...

... the opponenent in question knows how to build simple interpreters on top of his/her languages. ... something like (eval (read)) in your statically typed language. You can only implement an interpreter for (a subset of) Common Lisp (or a language with similar features) to... single bit what the underlying language is like that implements interpreter in question. It only needs to be...

... in question knows how to build simple interpreters on top of his/her languages. That's a Turing-equivalence argument. ...like (eval (read)) in your statically typed language. You can only implement an interpreter for (a subset of) Common Lisp (or a language with similar ... what the underlying language is like that implements interpreter in question. It only needs to be...

.... You don't need to implement an interpreter for a different language that has continuations for implementing exception handling in core Common Lisp, and this is what the implementation behind the link above shows. So ... whole thing is spiralling into a simple Turing argument. There is no easy ... here: Not easy in the current implementations or is callc somehow in conflict ...

.... You don't need to implement an interpreter for a different language that has continuations for implementing exception handling in core Common Lisp, ... whole thing is spiralling into a simple Turing argument. There is no easy ... my last version of the minim interpreter coming along? Your compiler-in-Lisp was the fastest of all implementations that I benchmarked. PILS and Qi ...

... Costanza wrote: No, exceptions can be implemented in a Common Lisp without exceptions... You don't need to implement an interpreter for a different language that has continuations for implementing exception handling in core Common Lisp, and this is what the implementation behind the link above shows. ...my last version of the minim interpreter coming along? Pascal -- My website: ...

...NOSPAM.invalid> wrote: Mark Tarver <dr.mtar...@ukonline.co.uk> writes: The task is to implement an interpreter for a language Minim and run a stock Minim program that adds two numbers x and y ... leads. Ah, but thats a compiler Paul, not an interpreter. ...and why would that matter?!? [The following should be quite ...

......@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote: Mark Tarver <dr.mtar...@ukonline.co.uk> writes: The task is to implement an interpreter for a language Minim and run a stock Minim program that adds two numbers x and y ... leads. Ah, but thats a compiler Paul, not an interpreter. ...and why would that matter?!? [The following should be quite fast - ...