Re: mixing lush with clush

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Yann LeCun wrote:

>> Another thing that I think is wrong with the DH compiler is the
>> way the compilable functions are currently coded (you find them
>> compiler/dh-macro). It's unreadable, hard to maintain code.
>
> The DH themselves aren't too bad,

:-)
I don't know. Why does it have to have an extra 'C side' object
for every 'Lisp side' object? Are there other reasons than the
option to compile standalone executables?


> but writing a compiler macro
> for an existing DX/DY function is more complicated than it should.

Yes, I guess that's what I meant.


>
> The main advantage of the DX/DY/compiler macro way is that
> they can handle polymorphism, while DHs can't do that at
> the moment.


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642