Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Bil Kleb <Bil.Kleb@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:37:11 -0400
Charles Coldwell wrote:
That sounds a lot like Lisp macros ("Lisp is a programmable programming
language" -- John Foderaro, CACM, September 1991).
See also Guy Steele's 1998 "Growing a Language" ACM OOPSLA keynote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8860158196198824415
(Fortran comes in now an then, but most predominately around 15:00.)
Regards,
--
Bil Kleb
http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov
.
- 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
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Gary Scott
- Re: F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- From: Charles Coldwell
- F2003 standard: Can Class(*) be used in generic proogramming?
- Prev by Date: Re: Rounding off double precision
- Next by Date: Re: what is wrong with this code?can someone walk me through this?
- 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
|
|
