Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #6125Re: Bondage and Discipline Languages
From: Daniel B Hankins
Date: Sat, 07 Jan 1989 23:43
Date: Sat, 07 Jan 1989 23:43
20 lines
1209 bytes
1209 bytes
In article <2630@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>I don't. I define a procedural language as one in which all modules have a
>parent-child relationship with each other. I also don't classify languages
>by implementation details... for example, SmallTalk uses messages to pass
>data between procedures, but since they generally have a parent-child
>relationship (one calls the other) they're still procedures.
Hmmm. By this definition, Prolog would have to be procedural.
Attempting to unify a clause results in a parent-child call to its
subclauses.
On the other hand, both ConcurrentSmalltalk and my language Theme
would have to be non-procedural because the message sends are real message
sends, not disguised procedure calls.
Is this really what you meant to say?
Dan Hankins
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<13293@cup.portal.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!dan-hankinsReferences:
<8540@megaron.arizona.edu> <2630@ficc.uu.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!dan-hankins From: dan-hankins@cup.portal.com (Daniel B Hankins) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Bondage and Discipline Languages Message-ID: <13293@cup.portal.com> Date: 7 Jan 89 23:43:24 GMT References: <8540@megaron.arizona.edu> <2630@ficc.uu.net> Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 20