[e-lang] Re: Interesting Paper.

Mark S. Miller markm at caplet.com
Sat Jan 18 01:26:10 UTC 2003


At 10:40 AM 1/17/2003 Friday, Anthony Hannan wrote:
>No, I wasn't aware of Joule.  I just ready several of the chapters at
>the above site and found it interesting.  I assume E is the latest
>incarnation of the Joule concepts.  

Yes, Joule is E's most direct ancestor. In many ways, E is a corruption of 
Joule for purposes of gaining widespread adoption. The two key corruptions are:
    1) A C/C++/Java/csh tradition syntax -- " if (x < y) { ... "
    2) A conventional sequential call-return sublanguage.
For myself personally, in many way I would prefer Joule. But due to the 
above two differences (especially #2), I despaired of Joule gaining 
widespread adoption; and so have spent the last five years working on E 
instead.

See http://www.erights.org/history/overview.html for an overview of E's family tree.

>But like you said, I did not find anything on type extensions.

Dean, could you explain type extension or point us at the right document?


----------------------------------------
Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain

        Cheers,
        --MarkM



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list