[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
|