Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!scs!spl1!lll-winken!lll-tis!mordor!joyce!ames!ncar!oddjob!uwvax!rutgers!columbia!cunixc!evan From: evan@cunixc.columbia.edu (Evan Bigall) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: What makes a language "easy" to program in? Message-ID: <712@cunixc.columbia.edu> Date: 7 Jun 88 12:47:54 GMT Article-I.D.: cunixc.712 References: <711@cunixc.columbia.edu> <3799@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> Reply-To: evan@cunixc.columbia.edu (Evan Bigall) Distribution: comp Organization: Columbia University Lines: 12 Its not easy, in fact its a bloody nuisance. Sometimes it helps to remember that pointers are just and index into a big array (all of memory), but not really. But, you have to remember that the lack of pointers is a feature not a bug. It removes the problem of aliasing allowing for a much better data flow/dependency analysis. I would much rather see records added to APL than pointers. Typically things like trees are implemented by indexing into tables. It makes for very clumsy and slow code, but hey this is APL! It wasnt meant to do things like that. Evan -- APL is a mistake, carried through to perfection. It is the language of the future for the programming techniques of the past. - Edsger Dijkstra