This would indeed fit into the "full spectrum" part of the Racket "stack" as presented in the manifesto and especially the presentation as given at (fifth RacketCon).
-- Matthias On Oct 15, 2015, at 9:11 PM, Neil Van Dyke <n...@neilvandyke.org> wrote: > Regarding Fortran, about 3 weeks ago, I looked into implementing a `#lang > fortran77` or `#lang fortran90`. > > Functionality-wise, it looks doable; speed-wise, not so great. I have no > further need for this, but it's an interesting practical/hobby project > someone might want to pursue. > > (For easy intermixing of Fortran and Racket code, there are boxing and > marshalling inefficiencies, especially when you combine that with code that > depends on behavior like shared mutations of very byte/word-layout-sensitive > overlaying/sharing of dissimilar types on the same memory. Though there do > appear to be lots of optimization opportunities, when you can prove that some > Fortran-specific language complications don't apply, to particular > procedures/variables/values/calls. The control flow construct mapping is > relatively easy. F77 and F90 parsing are both doable, and potentially a > little fun. I didn't get all the way into all the things that can be done > with arrays, and there might be other tricky Fortran features I didn't get > to. It would be a substantial project, for either a good practical reason or > a hobby.) > > Neil V. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Racket Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
