RE: interpreted languages

From: Russ Nelson <rn-handhelds_at_crynwr.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:53:00 -0400 (EDT)

Muller, Edward writes:
> I agree that using an interpreted language would 'probably' have
> more of a battery drain. But none is going to want to put linux/bsd
> on these devices if there aren't any apps.

No user is going to want to install it without apps. No developer is
going to want to install it without a programming language. Right now
I'm frustrated by the difficulty of writing a program for the iPAQ.
I'm casting about (casting pearls, casting aspersions) for a
solution. Keith and Dirk are right about the power inefficiency of an
interpreted language. But an interpreted language makes the same
machine useful for both a developer and a user, with no added resources.

-- 
-russ nelson <sig@russnelson.com>  http://russnelson.com | A hate crime makes
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | it illegal to think certain
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | thoughts.  The crime is
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | itself already a crime.
Received on Wed Sep 27 2000 - 10:49:04 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jul 25 2005 - 17:20:41 EDT