Exploring Dynamism - Revision history

Penni at 16:22, 17 September 2009

2009-09-17T16:22:44Z

Penni: /* Abstract */

2009-09-17T16:22:31Z

‎Abstract

Jrose at 18:52, 16 September 2009

2009-09-16T18:52:53Z

Jrose: New page: = Exploring Dynamism — Allison Randal = ;Slides: Image:Exploring_dynamism.pdf Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic ...

2009-09-16T18:45:01Z

New page: = Exploring Dynamism — Allison Randal = ;Slides: Image:Exploring_dynamism.pdf Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic ...

New page

= Exploring Dynamism — Allison Randal =

;Slides: [[Image:Exploring_dynamism.pdf]]

Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic features in tightly controlled doses to make them fit existing models developed for static languages. That attitude has changed in recent years, and the major commercial virtual machines are now actively pursuing support for dynamic features.

This renewed interest in dynamic languages leads to some questions. What are the defining characteristics of a dynamic language? Is it enough to support dynamic types? Is it enough to support dynamic dispatch? Is it enough to support the runtime generation of executable code entities (subroutines, methods, etc)? Is it enough to support introspection and meta-programming? This talk explores these questions and more, approaching the categorization of languages as static or dynamic as a graduated scale, rather than a hard binary divider.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:22, 17 September 2009
Line 5:		Line 5:

	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==
		+
		+	Exploring Dynamism — Allison Randal

	Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic features in tightly controlled doses to make them fit existing models developed for static languages. That attitude has changed in recent years, and the major commercial virtual machines are now actively pursuing support for dynamic features.		Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic features in tightly controlled doses to make them fit existing models developed for static languages. That attitude has changed in recent years, and the major commercial virtual machines are now actively pursuing support for dynamic features.

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 == Abstract ==
-  Exploring Dynamism — Allison Randal
+Exploring Dynamism — Allison Randal
 Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic features in tightly controlled doses to make them fit existing models developed for static languages. That attitude has changed in recent years, and the major commercial virtual machines are now actively pursuing support for dynamic features.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 = Exploring Dynamism &mdash; Allison Randal =
 ;Slides: [[Image:Exploring_dynamism.pdf]]
 Early R&D in modern dynamic languages was often marked by a conservative approach, taking dynamic features in tightly controlled doses to make them fit existing models developed for static languages. That attitude has changed in recent years, and the major commercial virtual machines are now actively pursuing support for dynamic features.
 This renewed interest in dynamic languages leads to some questions. What are the defining characteristics of a dynamic language? Is it enough to support dynamic types? Is it enough to support dynamic dispatch? Is it enough to support the runtime generation of executable code entities (subroutines, methods, etc)? Is it enough to support introspection and meta-programming? This talk explores these questions and more, approaching the categorization of languages as static or dynamic as a graduated scale, rather than a hard binary divider.