Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #6103Re: Bondage and Discipline Languages
From: Peter da Silva
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1989 14:10
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1989 14:10
18 lines
1477 bytes
1477 bytes
In article <8540@megaron.arizona.edu>, gudeman@arizona.edu (David Gudeman) writes: > I guess my understanding of "dataflow" is different from yours (and > since I've never studied the subject, I'm willing to admit ignorance), > but Icon's multiple-result feature is definitely procedural in nature. > At least it is if you would call co-routines procedural. I don't. A 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. Icon uses a stack to pass a stream of data between concurrently executing modules. They have a source/drain relationship. It's non-procedural. -- Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. `-_-' Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net. 'U` Opinions may not represent the policies of FICC or the Xenix Support group.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2630@ficc.uu.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!ficc!peterReferences:
<8540@megaron.arizona.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Bondage and Discipline Languages Message-ID: <2630@ficc.uu.net> Date: 5 Jan 89 14:10:53 GMT References: <8540@megaron.arizona.edu> Organization: Xenix Support Lines: 18