Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Gary Scott <garylscott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:05:10 GMT
Simulate wrote:
The meaning of me is that if CLASS(*) can be used in generic
programming in a perfect way,why "Intelligent macros" is planed to
contained in original Fortran 2008 standard?
Looks like everything we knew is now obsolete...
DSLs Lead Development Paradigm Shift
eWeek (03/26/08) Taft, Darryl K.
The software development community needs to move beyond its use of static, procedural languages and frameworks and start using language-oriented programming. ThoughtWorks senior application architect Neal Ford, speaking at TheServerSide Java Symposium on March 26, says domain-specific languages (DSL) are designed for specific tasks. Ford says ThoughtWorks colleague Ola Bini envisions a future stack of basic programming tools consisting of a "stable language" at the bottom level, with dynamic languages built on top of that, and DSLs added at the top layer. Ford says that DSLs improve the software development process by "eliminating noise," and that programmers experienced in dynamic languages tend to build DSLs on top of their low-level language. "Using DSLs evolves the way we build and use frameworks, escalating our abstraction levels closer to the problem domains and farther from implementation details," Ford says.
--
Gary Scott
mailto:garylscott@sbcglobal dot net
Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com
Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org
-OR-
Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html
If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done.
-- Henry Ford
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Paul van Delst
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Charles Coldwell
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Bil Kleb
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: hit . lishuang
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- References:
- F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Simulate
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Arjen Markus
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Simulate
- F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- Prev by Date: Press any key to continue?
- Next by Date: Re: Press any key to continue?
- Previous by thread: Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- Next by thread: Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|