Re: PostLisp, a language experiment

From: Albert van der Horst (albert_at_spenarnc.xs4all.nl)
Date: 03/21/05 

Date: 21 Mar 2005 10:04:14 GMT

In article <1111345511.760616.76470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
billy <wtanksleyjr@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>You can argue that for some definition of "essentially the same
>program". I would hope your arguments would never have any practical
>effect, though; if they did, people would be using assembler where C
>was appropriate or vice versa. The languages are different and have
>different effects on programs written in them.

If you are using GCC, each program is converted to assembly first,
representing the same program.
This is a statement of fact. I wonder why you are worried of
"practical effects" of me stating it. Is it something like the
theory of evolution that should not be taught because it is too
convincing?

<SNIP>

>Stupid factoring can build a 10,000 line program out of 10-line modules
>(contrary to your statement that a 10,000 line program could never be
>built from 10-line modules).

10,000 line programs are rare in Forth. I have't seen any that
are stupid and built of 10-line (let us say 10 Words of Code)
modules.
I challenged you for an example. My "unheard for Forth" still stands.

What I tried to say that if you rebuild a 10K WOC program of 1K WOC
modules, using 10 WOC modules, you do not end up with a 10K WOC
program. It will become much smaller. That causes a drop in
maintainability chores and increases reliability.

Lately Bernd Paysan showed an example of "even better" factoring.
We shouldn't use the term "stupid factoring" for the best efforts
of those less brilliant. "bad or non-optimal factoring" will do.

>-Billy
>

Groetjes Albert 

--
-- 
Albert van der Horst,Oranjestr 8,3511 RA UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
        One man-hour to invent,
                One man-week to implement,
                        One lawyer-year to patent.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Surrogate factoring, mysteries
    ... methods) that would be evidence you are on to something. ... You claimed to have "solved" the factoring problem. ... >While I have nowhere else to go, many of you will criticize. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Surrogate factoring mysteries resolved
    ... > Now combinations of factors are important, as the proper algorithm ... does the number of divisors increase in a cubic fashion? ... No one doubts that factoring is hard. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Surrogate factoring mysteries resolved
    ... > Now combinations of factors are important, as the proper algorithm ... does the number of divisors increase in a cubic fashion? ... No one doubts that factoring is hard. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: JSH: Nearly done
    ... Nora Baron wrote: ... >>So what does that have to do with factoring? ... Rick ...
    (sci.math)