| From: | John DeSoi <desoi(at)pgedit(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joshua Tolley <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Douglas McNaught" <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>, znmeb(at)cesmail(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Lisp as a procedural language? |
| Date: | 2008-10-21 00:18:40 |
| Message-ID: | 73060FDE-80FF-4C58-93BD-156B6D191756@pgedit.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Oct 20, 2008, at 3:00 PM, Joshua Tolley wrote:
> One of the Java-as-a-procedural-language options uses RMI to get the
> server talking to a separate JVM, where the actual function processing
> gets done. Could a PL/Lisp work similarly (and would it be anything
> approaching a good idea...)?
I think it could work, but it is hard to say how good an idea it would
be without being more familiar with the implementation details on what
it takes to create a complete procedural language.
There might be some useful ideas from SLIME (http://common-lisp.net/project/slime/
) which connects to many different Lisp implementations to provide a
Lisp IDE in Emacs.
BTW, this is Lisp's 50th birthday being celebrated today at OOPSLA.
John DeSoi, Ph.D.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul Schlie | 2008-10-21 02:26:26 | Re: Block-level CRC checks |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-20 22:54:04 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Properly access a buffer's LSN using existing access macros |