Is Flex/Actionscript a real programming language? Can it do what Java does? (work offline, write files, networking etc.)

Post by dpapathanasiou » Wed, May 02, 2007, 4:39 PM UTC

juwo wrote: post #13

jaggederest wrote: post #9

Why would you want to compare it to java? Ye gods man, java/c/c++/c# aren't exactly the kind of languages I'd want a new language to compare with. Python, Ruby, Haskell98, ocaml, etc. Consider those your languages that set the bar right now. Java is 'the new' C.

Never heard of them. (heard of ruby only here, in YC). old wine in new bottles. if-then-else by any other name... is just as tedious.

Post by dpapathanasiou » Wed, May 02, 2007, 7:18 PM UTC

juwo wrote: post #22

dpapathanasiou wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

old wine in new bottles No, it's the difference between Turing imperative (e.g. C++, Java, etc.) and Lamdba calculus (lisp, erlang, ocaml, etc.) which is significant .

but underlying it is a turing machine, right?

Post by dpapathanasiou » Thu, May 03, 2007, 1:44 PM UTC

juwo wrote: post #24

dpapathanasiou wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Turing and Lambda are different ways of representing the same underlying assembly code. You're correct in that there is a direct line from the Turing imperative to the underlying assembly code, but given the choice between writing Lambda expressions or Turing expressions, why would you pick the latter?

Even the lambda expression when running on the computer, is acting out a Turing machine; head travels over symbols on a tape, reads a symbol, changes state, stops or moves... that is what I meant by old wine in new bottles.

Post by juwo » Fri, May 04, 2007, 5:22 PM UTC

juwo wrote: post #26

dpapathanasiou wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're correct, unless your hardware is specifically designed for lambda calculus (like one of those old lisp machines), lambda code gets compiled into Turing instructions. But why code in a Turing style (whether it's Java or assembly) when lambda programming is more efficient? That's the point all the lambda folks are making.

"unless your hardware is specifically designed for lambda calculus (like one of those old lisp machines)" No, I am talking about - at a deeper level, all computing can be reduced to a Turing machine. (Unless you are reading Roger Penrose on consciousness). Maybe I am mistaken, I am out of touch.