On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:21:52 -0400, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.net>
wrote:
> If your efforts save Dan Sugalski time in implementing Python on Parrot,
> realize that it may cost me a round of drinks and a laundry run (if
> Dan has a good aim).
On the other hand, if Parrot provides stacklessness, JIT compilation,
cross-language interop, and pushes some complex C-level maintenance burden
onto other people, perhaps you'll consider consider the laundry run and
drinks worth it in the end. No way to find out if Parrot is up to the task
without trying...
> OTOH there may be a devilish plan here to let Dan believe he won't
> have to work very hard, and then in the end he'll lose because your
> implementations are inefficcient... :-)
For some reason the Parrot developers seem more focused on working with
bytecode; see Dan Sugalski's weblog at
http://www.sidhe.org/~dan/blog/archives/000205.html . (There's an amusing
link in the comments for a Python-bytecode-to-SAX-event-stream translator;
my mind is boggled.) Bytecode translation doesn't strike me as a very
useful course to follow, because Python's bytecode is vulnerable to being
changed between versions and because looking at bytecode provides less
information than looking at an AST.
--amk (www.amk.ca)
MENELAUS: An odd man, lady? Every man is odd.
-- _Troilus and Cressida_, IV, v
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4