By applying both transformations, you reduce each language to semantic constructs, libraries, and performance characteristics, so you can more objectively compare languages.
-
-
Show this thread
-
The big differences are in higher order types (dynamic types vs C++ templates vs Haskell quantifiers and typeclasses vs ML modules vs Java/C# generics), memory management and safety (manual vs garbage-collected vs compiler-assisted), and evaluation (lazy vs eager).
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's utterly impractical to write it directly, but isn't LLVM-IR an example of the second?
-
Too much UB, for too long anyway. Fixed? Cc:
@jfbastien - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
When you say “universal syntax” are you referring to transpiling to say C or JavaScript, as is often done?
-
Lisp is the universal syntax. Some people just haven’t realized it yet.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Would love to talk with you about some ideas for fortnite
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
LLVM can generate webassembly, webassembly is not the same thing as llvm.
-
I believe the comparison is wasm and llvm-ir, not wasm and llvm.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.