Re: Shared game-data
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox_at_dmitry-kazakov.de>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 19:51:25 +0200
Message-ID: <ohrehczudlkk.1xu8qagsv0xk2.dlg_at_40tude.net>
>>>Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 30 Apr 2006 20:15:46 -0700, Marshall Spight wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>It would be an improvement over the current state of affairs
>>>>>if the programmer had a language with which to express
>>>>>the logical semantics of his program, and a separate
>>>>>language with which to express implementation. Thus
>>>>>different implementations could by tried out, manually,
>>>>>and measured, without affecting the results of the
>>>>>program.
>>>>
>>>>Why not to do it in one language?
>>>
>>>If the language fully separates the concern for correctness from the
>>>concern for performance, I am not entirely certain how the single
>>>language would differ from two languages.
>>>
>>>That part of the language concerned with correctness could make no
>>>reference to physical structures like pointers, indexes etc. One would
>>>then end up with two distinct sub-languages in any case.
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 19:51:25 +0200
Message-ID: <ohrehczudlkk.1xu8qagsv0xk2.dlg_at_40tude.net>
On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:02:59 GMT, Bob Badour wrote:
> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > >> On Mon, 01 May 2006 13:37:45 GMT, Bob Badour wrote: >> >>
>>>Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 30 Apr 2006 20:15:46 -0700, Marshall Spight wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>It would be an improvement over the current state of affairs
>>>>>if the programmer had a language with which to express
>>>>>the logical semantics of his program, and a separate
>>>>>language with which to express implementation. Thus
>>>>>different implementations could by tried out, manually,
>>>>>and measured, without affecting the results of the
>>>>>program.
>>>>
>>>>Why not to do it in one language?
>>>
>>>If the language fully separates the concern for correctness from the
>>>concern for performance, I am not entirely certain how the single
>>>language would differ from two languages.
>>>
>>>That part of the language concerned with correctness could make no
>>>reference to physical structures like pointers, indexes etc. One would
>>>then end up with two distinct sub-languages in any case.
>> >> OK, if they won't leak through reflection. > > You don't seem to understand the concept of fully separating the concerns.
Yep, split personality isn't my concern(s). (Sorry, couldn't resist. (:-))
-- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.deReceived on Mon May 01 2006 - 19:51:25 CEST