[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 

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


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list