[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Dylan and executables?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org (Sam Griffith)
- Subject: Dylan and executables?
- From: Steve Strassmann <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 19:08:16 -0500
- Cc: info-mcl, dylan-comments
> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 92 18:12:35 CDT
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Sam Griffith)
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Dylan and executables?
You've got some good questions, but I'd like to prevent (if I can)
the info-mcl list from becoming a Dylan discussion list. While
we know there's an awfully large overlap in interest, it's better
to keep things in their proper places.
Apple has not set up a two-way Dylan discussion list or newsgroup
so far, but you are encouraged to send your comments to us at
> I've browsed the dylan spec, and I was wondering, since dylan is geared
> more towards actually producing, (I can't remember how it was phrased in
> the manual) a more deliverable based dynamic language, what is the overhead
> for being dynamic, ie. - every program will have to include a runtime,
> what is the size of that runtime.
Overhead is a matter of implementation, not necessarily an intrinsic
aspect of the language per se. Since a language's programs might be
expected to run on different configurations of hardware and O/S,
and with many different kinds of compiler technology, it's impossible
to compare apples and, uh, seaweed.
> Also, how does the performance of dylan
> compare to some of the other OOP languages, say Smalltalk, Obj-C, and C++.
> In that same area, what optimizations, will dylan make on an executable to
> optimize out unused methods, classes, etc.?
Again, it's impossible to comment on performance in the abstract, but
we have designed Dylan from the start to allow these kinds of optimizations.
> Another thing, the manual mentions wanting other companies to port it to
> other machines. Is this happening?
Yes. If you are interested in writing your own Dylan implementation
(either commercial or non-commercial) please drop us a line.
> Also, exceptions, collections, and the I/O lib are mentioned in the book.
> What other libraries are going to be standard per say?
We haven't made any specific announcements yet.
> What about the possiblity of persistence being part of the language definition?
We haven't made any announcements about that yet, either. It is always
possible as a library extension to the language, and if you have comments
or suggestions, we're always glad to hear them.
>Sam Griffith Jr.