Re: About task-specific programming languages

Paul Robinson wrote:


> We also don't have any working microkernels available;


As John already pointed out, microkernels are working all around you,
e.g. in cell phones, cars, DVD players, data acquisition and other
equipment...


Many programming systems (Forth, Java...) allow to produce turnkey
applications, running on a naked hardware, since decades.




> And so we've come full circle: at the application level, "micro
> languages" or task-specific languages and programming systems such as
> macro and scripting languages, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby/Ruby on Rails,
> Tcl, and SQL (and if I've left out your favorite, presume it's
> included), are just as important for some problem domains as
> "monolithic languages" (the third-generation languages) such as Basic,
> C/C++, Cobol, Fortran, Pascal, etc.


Other classifications separate general purpose (C...) from specialized
(SQL...) languages, or compiled (C...) from interpreted (SQL...) or
emulated (Java...) languages.


Your "microkernel" languages IMO fall in the category "highly platform
independent" languages, which only require the installation of the
according interpreter or emulator (VM) on a target system.


DoDi

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.