Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 10:04:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Michael Reifenberger <mike@reifenberger.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, Ivan Voras <ivoras@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Interpreted language(s) in the base Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1008160950300.13918@gw.reifenberger.com> In-Reply-To: <2295.1281943489@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <2295.1281943489@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: ... > PS: The sickening irony is that today we have two embedded languages, > one in the kernel even, and it is the most crappy ones you can > imagine: Forth and ACPI. > Besides the syntax FORTH ist the only embeddable high level language which has both intepreter and compiler built in. It has a small form factor too. One alternative could be something like WABA (http://waba.sourceforge.net/). Besides the wrong license it would mean to have pre-compiled byte code on the FS and no chance to recompile on the fly... Or ECMAScript as a pure interpreted language. Bye/2 --- Michael Reifenberger Michael@Reifenberger.com http://www.Reifenberger.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1008160950300.13918>