| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Doing it for the kids, man
Doing it for the kids, man
Posted Oct 30, 2006 10:12 UTC (Mon) by eru (subscriber, #2753)In reply to: Doing it for the kids, man by dcoutts
Parent article: Doing it for the kids, man: Children's laptop inspires open source projects (LinuxWorld)
There's no particular reason that using nicer languages should need lots more memory or cpu power - at least if you stick to compiled implementations.
Or not even compiled, just well-written. In the early days of PC:s interpreted languages were actually very common despte the slow machines, because they allowed software development faster (compiling with floppy disks or old slow HD:s was painfully time-consuming) and they also required less disk space (no need to store intermediate objs or the final exe). The interpreters themselves were typically carefully crafted in assembler, or at least their core parts were (the rest was often in libraries written in the interpreted langauge itself).
(Log in to post comments)
Doing it for the kids, man
Posted Nov 2, 2006 11:01 UTC (Thu) by lysse (subscriber, #3190) [Link]
Hmm. Are you perhaps thinking of Forth here? :) More interestingly (and quite off-topic, but trips down memory lane are fun), are there any other languages you're referring to?
Doing it for the kids, man
Posted Nov 17, 2006 13:47 UTC (Fri) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link]
are there any other languages you're referring to?Various dialects of BASIC. Don't laugh. It used to be a very common way of implementing real microcomputer and minicomputer apps (which typically were much simpler in those days than now, so the inherent deficiencies in the language design did not matter so much).