Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch roadmap 1 (and "what's tom up to")

[Tobias C. Rittweiler]

On Thursday, July 1, 2004 at 8:21:58 PM, 
    Tom Lord <address@hidden> wrote:

>     > Tom, this aspect certainly looks *interesting* and useful, but I yet
>     > have to mediate about the *practical* usefulness, because I can imagine
>     > a loss when it comes down to actual /integration/ (note: this is clearly
>     > not the same as combination). Did you already collect insights wrt this?
>
> I don't quite understand what issue you mean by "/integration/" so I'm
> not sure how to answer.

The integration between different language features and facilities in
either ways: technical as well as social.

An example for the technical integration is memory management. Another
one is flow of control, especially languages with heavy use of exception
vs. those without any kind of stack-unwinding exception handling.

Social integration is how well a certain facility of one language is
perceived to fit into another. I can recall a usenet post from you to
CLL, in which you asked what would be if there was a way to have all
the python library available for lisp/scheme (I think that may even
be a historical reason for furth now?) at the cost of a lousy
integration of this foreign library into the lisp programming model.

My problem is that, assumed that the technical obstacles aren't too
hairy, I'm not convinced that in praxis the usefulness will be as
great as one might thought a priori for the reason of social integration
above. On the other hand, it's worth a try. :-)


-- tcr (address@hidden)  ``Ho chresim'eidos uch ho poll'eidos sophos''