[Python-Dev] Parrot -- should life imitate satire?
Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:55:37 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>> "ESR" == Eric S Raymond <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
ESR> Let's suppose, for the sake of the design discussion, that we
ESR> can make the type ontologies of the Perl and Python bytecode
ESR> match up.
What is a type ontology? The definition of ontology I'm familiar with
is too broad to be useful in understanding what you're getting at.
I've never heard the technical term "type ontology".
ESR> (Note: making the type ontologies of the two bytecodes match is
ESR> not the same problem as making the type ontologies of the
ESR> *languages* match up. It should be rather simpler because a
ESR> lot of the differences between, e.g., class semantics can
ESR> probably be compiled away. Not a trivial problem, but humor
If I guess at what you mean-- a fuzzy notion that the underlying type
system can support both languages-- then I submit that most of the
hard problems are indeed here.
ESR> Let's further suppose that we have a callout mechanism from the
ESR> Parrot interpreter core to the Perl or Python runtime's C level
ESR> that can pass out Python/Perl types and return them.
Not quite sure what you mean ehre.
ESR> Given these two premises, what other problems are there?
ESR> I can see one: garbage collection. What others are there?
I think you mean memory management in general, not just GC. Others:
thread model, interpreter management (such as creating embedded