On May 28, 5:19 pm, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Kind of like how this year's program won't work on next year's > > Python? > > For somebody who has admitted to have only very rudimentary knowledge of > python that's a pretty bold statement, don't you think? > > > Except Flaming Thunder is faster. ;) > > Faster in execution speed for a very limited domain of problems - maybe. > > But unless it grows support for structured data types, arrays and maybe > even an object system - it's nothing but a toy language. I wouldn't even call it a toy language, it seems more like a sandbox for fumbling around in compiler technology and language "design" (loosely speaking). Fun as a research or alpha-stage project but nowhere near production-ready. To be fair, the graphics look cool and the "single-asset 8-by-8 shotgun cross compiler, written entirely in assembly language" sounds impressive from an implementation point of view, in the sense that building Deep Blue with nothing but NAND gates would; utterly impressive and pointless at the same time. Which goes to prove that hardcore hackers don't necessarily make decent language designers. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
