[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Eval - Pro's and Con's (was Re: Dylan rather than CL -- why?)

To: jeff@aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk, rwk@world.std.com
Subject: Re: Eval - Pro's and Con's (was Re: Dylan rather than CL -- why?)
From: dyer@eagle.sharebase.com (Scot Dyer)
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 92 15:42:14 PST
Cc: dyer@eagle.sharebase.com, info-dylan@cambridge.apple.com

/// Right.  After all, if you want to lose the interpretter/search engine's
/// overhead, you certainly want to lose EVAL's overhead, and run compiled!

This is why it's important to use a DYnamic LANguage.

I don't know about everyone else, but I'm sick of this thread and my mail
reader doesn't have a kill file.  Can we please talk about DYLAN?

	-- Scot

Prev by Date: Fat language features.
Next by Date: read, eval, and damaged languages
Previous by thread: Re: Eval - Pro's and Con's (was Re: Dylan rather than CL -- why?)
Next by thread: Eval - Pro's and Con's (was Re: Dylan rather than CL -- why?)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread