Subject: Re: [lojban] Back to the GNOME stuff

From: Value Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 03:27:57 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Edward Cherlin wrote:

> Fine. Now what about an APL interpreter, or the inner and outer
> interpreters in FORTH, a hardware interpreter for microcode or a
> hardware compiler translating source code to wiring lists and
> diagrams? What about systems that offer to run the same source code
> through a selection of processes, including interpretation,
> just-in-time compilation, virtual machine compilation with emulation
> (byte code interpretation), cross-compilation, or any of the other
> alternatives? What about translation from one language to another? I
> can cite APL-to-C, APL-to-Ada, C-to-PostScript, FORTRAN to Ratfor,
> and an assortment of other such translators used for serious work.

Let's be careful not to overspecify these terms in order to respect
differences in a field that changes radically each decade. Some of these
things you mention here are already obsolete and not even 40 years old.
(No, I'm not going to entertain a religious war about any of them) We
should be aiming for concepts that will endure at least a few more
decades, yes?

Now, do we want to divide the reality into concepts different than the
ones invented by the Silicon Valley people? It might be interesting to do
that. However if we don't, then why not import the whole list of words
like

> process, which may invoke a preprocessor, assembler, optimizer,
> linker, loader....

as fu'ivla?

------
1.Why are you measuring the measure? The measure is the same. Even after
Great One, the bones will be broken. I am telling you. Relic should believe me.
2.Where after religion you believe in religion and wish that to Ora.
Emptiness is that what Baby God's Eye is fighting for.