Related articles |
---|
[5 earlier articles] |
Re: Practicality of functional and logic languages? hdev@dutiai.twi.tudelft.nl (1993-01-13) |
Practicality of functional and logic languages? lock@karlsruhe.gmd.de (1993-01-14) |
Re: Practicality of functional and logic languages? nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (1993-01-14) |
Re: Practicality of functional and logic languages? joe@erix.ericsson.se (1993-01-14) |
Re: Practicality of functional and logic languages? aet@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (1993-01-15) |
Re: Practicality of functional and logic languages? johnson@cs.uiuc.edu (1993-01-15) |
Re: Practicality of functional and logic languages? glew@pdx007.intel.com (1993-02-03) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | glew@pdx007.intel.com (Andy Glew) |
Keywords: | functional |
Organization: | Intel Corp., Hillsboro, Oregon |
References: | 93-01-059 |
Date: | Wed, 3 Feb 1993 06:32:47 GMT |
I would like to know some opinions concerning functional and logic
programming languages and their practical usability for programming:
Not directly related, but some varieties of functional and applicative
languages map much more naturally into hardware (VLSI) implementations
than procedural languages.
If efficient compilers could be generated for these languages, they would
be the preferred hardware modelling technique for many designers.
Ironically, in many design groups procedural languages are considered
"higher level", because the better compiled code permits simulations to be
done much quicker than code produced in the applicative style. The
applicative style is often used for lower level "structural" design.
Note: I must admit that I am keying off single assignment form languages.
although many of the other features of functional and applicative
languages are also useful in hardware design.
--
Andy Glew, glew@ichips.intel.com
Intel Corp., M/S JF1-19, 5200 NE Elam Young Pkwy,
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-6497
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.