Re: [q-lang-users] Speeding up Q

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

Dr Libor Spacek wrote:
> In my view it should be a high priority getting Q to tun faster in order to gain the user base that it deserves.

Did you read my mind? ;-)

Actually, being on vacation right now, I started playing around with
LLVM. In the beginning that was just for fun, but then I began writing a
"tiny demo interpreter" to see how well it works out. Well, actually
it's not quite so tiny any more, after hacking away on it for two weeks,
in some ways it's already much better than Q, with a much cleaner
syntax, a more minimalistic and dynamic design, real closures (local
functions, yay!) and a few other goodies.

The interpreter environment including parser and abstract term rewriting
code generator is already working and I'm currently doing the final
touches on the TR -> LLVM JIT code translator. I'm not ready to unveil
it just yet, but I'll follow up as soon as I have something that can at
least evaluate 1+1 => 2. :)

The language and interpreter are codenamed "Pure" a.k.a. the "Pure
Universal Rewriting Engine", and I do have a preliminary manpage for it,
which I'm attaching as a little teaser. ;-)

Cheers,
Albert

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag