firstname.lastname@example.org (RT Happe) writes:
> On 15 Jan 2003, Yoann Padioleau wrote:
> > David Rush <email@example.com> writes:
> > > beginning. Full TCO *was* and that is *much* more important.
> > TCO = ???
> (tail call optimisation)
i dont see TCO as part of the design of scheme, but more to the design
of the compiler.
I prefer than a langage designer focus on programmer productivity rather
than program efficiency (that is why i hate all those C/C++/... langages).
> > Functionnal zealots say that functionnal langage are better suited to
> > automatic
> > parallelism but i am still waiting.
> Sisal was a minor success story story in that respect, rivaling automatic
> vectorisers/parallelisers for Fortran. (Sisal is a single-assignment
> language geared to scientific computation; no higher-type functions, but
> suitable vector and matrix operations. Its funding and development has
> been discontinued.)
Yoann Padioleau, INSA de Rennes, France,
Opinions expressed here are only mine. Je n'écris qu'à titre personnel.
**____ Get Free. Be Smart. Simply use Linux and Free Software. ____**