[M3devel] new target? :)

[Daniel Alejandro Benavides D.]

Hi all:
yeah, but others had very distinct opinions in tis own right with two experimental projects:
http://sandbox.parc.com/parctab/csl9501/node6.html

and same house:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/origami/Origami1997c/

and prior another one which had experience with Trestle
http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/mobile93/kantarjiev.html

So even with the space limitations the systems run in Modula-3 technically better than any other implementation for its computing environment. Perhaps that is the point he computing paradigm and specially performance is vastly superior than those days to run something like Modula-3, but maybe more easy for Obliq nowadays.
Thanks in advance

--- El jue, 24/2/11, Mika Nystrom <mika at async.caltech.edu> escribió:

> De: Mika Nystrom <mika at async.caltech.edu>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] new target? :)
> Para: "Jay K" <jay.krell at cornell.edu>
> CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> Fecha: jueves, 24 de febrero, 2011 17:15
> Jay K writes:
> ...
> >Ultimately..you can tell what I'm going to say..a good
> solution is Modula-3=
> >-to-C=2C and then use whatever C compiler you want.
> >Including the nativeclient gcc. An iPhone/iPad/iPod
> cross compiler. Older s=
> 
> I'm still curious why they abandoned this path.  The
> first M3 compilers
> all generated C code.  I read something about a
> Modula-2 compiler that
> was generating C code and therefore had problems with..
> something.
> 
> Also isn't the back-end m3cg actually quite an interesting
> program in
> its own right?  You could imagine targeting other
> language front-ends
> to that back-end.  I understand it is a good enough
> idea that RMS was
> very annoyed that m3cg even exists.
> 
>     Mika
>