Re: Python recompile

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
 

On 05/03/2025 23:36, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>

On 05/03/2025 02:20, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>

On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 01:20:07 +0000, bart wrote:
>

I maintain my own scripting language.  Building it from source - on
Windows - takes 70ms:

>
How wonderful.  Does it offer Python-style features?

>
No, it offers my-style features, that is, things I find useful:
>
[long list of features]

>
My understanding is that it is missing the two most important
features of a programming language:
>
   (1) a user manual that defines and documents the language
>
   (2) an available implementation so that other people can
       use it to write programs

>
The 1990s version, where it supported a substantial application, had a
350-page manual.  That one was used by other people to create add-on
products.
>
But it's now a personal tool and I only have reference material for my
own use.

 
If you post some links where I can download a current user
manual and a current compiler or interpreter, I will gladly
withdraw my comment.
 
Otherwise, I stand by my comment, and see no reason to
consider your alleged environment as anything other than
fiction-ware.

Bart has a project on github.  In the past he provides part
of source code for his languages.  More precisely, he provided
generated C source code for C compiler, generated C source
code for implementation of his "dynamic" Q language, and
source for compiler of his M language (in Q).  So, those
things existed and run times were consitent with what he
claimed.  AFAICS parts of source we missing, and it seems
that he later removed the sources from github.

Also, at various times Bart provide links to download executables,
they were of no interest to me as they would not run natively
on Linux.  Also, my personal policy is to run only programs that
I compile myself from sources or that come as part of Linux
distribution.

For me most interesting aspect was that it was possible to
compile as fast as Bart claimed.  Given incomplete sources
and language features for me the actual languages were less
interesting.  But his languages are clearly real and there
was some documentation and sizable sample of source code.

I fetched the files in 2017, so what he has now is probably
somewhat different.

--
                              Waldek Hebisch