Re: Mathematica to .NET compiler
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg79530] Re: Mathematica to .NET compiler
- From: Peter Pein <petsie at dordos.net>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 05:42:24 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <200707200725.DAA24728@smc.vnet.net> <f7sflm$rs0$1@smc.vnet.net> <f86onh$g19$1@smc.vnet.net> <f89p6l$54l$1@smc.vnet.net> <12189822.1185457140095.JavaMail.root@m35> <f8cgc0$3pf$1@smc.vnet.net>
DrMajorBob schrieb:
>
> Ah, this wouldn't be that company with the unexplained crashes, viruses,
> spontaneously corrupted and ever-increasing trash-dump registries,
> infinitely recurring updates, new versions that won't install on 3-yr-old
> machines, the most intrusive "browser" on the planet, and...
>
> Not THAT company?
>
> I'll stick to Mathematica, thanks.
>
> Bobby
>
Uhh! I feel negative vibrations. ;-)
I shortly left the OS of THAT company on a small partition of my disk to
play some games, I've been used to play and I'm not sure if I tend to
ubuntu or fedora linux (preference goes to ubuntu). Exaggerated: I feel
better, if I _want_ to upgrade my OS every six months than if I'm forced
to reinstall it every six weeks.
There are possibilities far from THAT company that would make it
interesting to start such a project. And I will try as sonn as I'm
familar with some of the set {Haskell, OCaml, Mercury, and maybe others}.
And this will be in a not so near future. Learning a new topic isn't as
easy as it used to be twenty years ago :-(
But I can't imagine any fast possibility without strong binding of
variables to types. And you do not like it, if I remember an other
posting of you correctly.
Regards,
Peter
- References:
- Mathematica to .NET compiler
- From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
- Mathematica to .NET compiler