Talk:Anagrams: Difference between revisions

Line 62:

::: The interesting issue, here, I think, is: how complete is this entry? How hard is it for another programmer (like [[User:Paddy3118|Paddy]]) to make this solution work? [This is an exercise I often try, when I see something in a language that I am curious about.] Looking at the language page, FBSL supports grammar and syntax of several languages. Perl6 has analogous plans. I think that the primary issues here are syntax (which can be abstracted within a ''top level block scope'' if it's simple enough) and semantics - which mostly just eat storage for the implementation. There can also be issues of names and contexts (scopes) but that only matters when they are dirty (when they appear on the interface boundaries between modules). Given modern machine sizes (I'm composing this on a laptop with 16GB ram and half a terabyte of disk), and Moore's law, I expect more of this "melding of languages" in the future. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 12:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:Sorry guys, I'm not yet familiar with this site's ways of communication so I'm writing this by direct editing of the page.

:@Paddy: There's no need for excessive verbosity. Please take a deep breath and re-read my message again. I'm not just another script kiddie to talk to as if I were a moron.

:Quote Paddy: So are you saying that FBSL contains both a dynamic assembler and a dynamic C JIT (is that a compiler or interpreter) as subsets of the language? Unquote

:Quote TheWatcher: Dynamic Assembler and Dynamic C JIT compilers are indispensable features of FBSL alongside its interpretative environment. Unquote

:So what's not clear to you in this description? FBSL is an interpreter and its intrinsic DynAsm and DynC layers are JIT compilers that convert their listings into native (a.k.a. executable, a.k.a. machine) code in memory at app start concurrently with FBSL's own bytecode they are supposed to interact with.

:Quote Paddy: This is supposed to be a site for comparing language features. Unquote

:Now you can compare FBSL that has such a language feature with other languages that haven't.

:Quote Paddy: You should not be surprised if someone sees one languages entry copied and used for another language and questions it. Unquote

:I am not surprised at all at such jealosy. Just show me one other language where you can copy-paste the C solution into ''except'' C proper ''and'' FBSL to see it run happily.

:Quote Paddy ... how FBSL can use stock C ... Unquote

:In any way one likes. The rest depends on one's literacy in C.

:Quote Paddy: ... I do not know how well integrated C is with FBSL. Unquote

:Please see above.

:Quote Paddy: the FBSL entry looks like a wrapper for a C compiler/interpreter/JIT. Unquote

:It was my deliberate choice. Perhaps, someday I'm gonna add a handful of lines as a pure BASIC (Freestyle BASIC Script Language, that is) alternative to the same task. As for "compiler/interpreter/JIT", please see above.

:Quote Paddy: You could use the site to show why it is more than that with careful explanation and use of unique or near-unique features. Unquote

:Perhaps I will, if you don't scare me off of it before I do.

:Quote Paddy: Yep its tough when you're different... Unquote

:I'm leaving that out to your own conscience as irrelevant to the topic in question.

:@Rdm:

:Quote Rdm: How hard is it for another programmer (like [[User:Paddy3118|Paddy]]) to make this solution work? Unquote

:Perhaps Paddy even tried to implement it in his own language? "Been there", Paddy? "Done that"?

:Quote Rdm: Perl6 has analogous plans. Unquote

:Glad they are following the same trends. Means my own vision of the future is not unreasonable.

:Quote Rdm: Given modern machine sizes... Unquote

:No way. The Fbsl.exe v3.5 executable's footprint is only 580KB of un-exepacked binary code for everything it has to offer. No dependencies except for the Windows' standard system DLL's.

:Now thanks for this fruitful discussion. So what is the verdict?

:Kind regards,

:TheWatcher