nemesis wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 escreveu:
>> FP languages have been around for decades, and never gone anywhere.
> 
> Never had a chance in a heavily imperative mindset built around 
> sequential Turing machines.

I don't think it was the mindset as much as it was the hardware.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Understanding the structure of the universe
    via religion is like understanding the
     structure of computers via Tron.

Post a reply to this message

>>> FP languages have been around for decades, and never gone anywhere.
>>
>> Never had a chance in a heavily imperative mindset built around 
>> sequential Turing machines.
> 
> I don't think it was the mindset as much as it was the hardware.

Indeed. A Turning machine is a *machine*. It's readily obvious how you'd 
implement it, or something resembling it.

The Lambda calculus isn't a machine. It's a vague mathematical 
abstraction. It's not at all obvious how you'd use it in the real world. 
It's a language, not a machine for running a language.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Indeed. A Turning machine is a *machine*. It's readily obvious how you'd implement
it, or something resembling it. 

Kind of vice versa, really.

> It's a language, not a machine for running a language.

Well, you could imagine a machine to do it. Just hard to figure out how 
you'd build such a thing.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Understanding the structure of the universe
    via religion is like understanding the
     structure of computers via Tron.

Post a reply to this message