5 ms·
Wow, since the author starts talking about "Omega" without introducing it as a concept of some ultimate language, I assumed he was talking about the Omega Progr
by shasta 16y ago
Wow, since the author starts talking about "Omega" without introducing it as a concept of some ultimate language, I assumed he was talking about the Omega Programming Language (In fact, it looks like there are two: http://code.google.com/p/omega/ http://code.google.com/p/omega/ and http://www.pervasive.jku.at/About_Us/Staff/_Blaschek/Omega/ http://www.pervasive.jku.at/About_Us/Staff/_Blaschek/Omega/) and was thoroughly confused.
- Inaimathi 16y agoSorry about the confusion. "Omega" was a reference to the Seibel talk I quote from, in which he casually postulates Omega as the most powerful language that might be built for current architectures.
- primodemus 16y agoyour first link points to Tim Sheard's Omega, a dependently typed programming language. Dependent types allow the programmer to codify arbitrary invariants in the types of the expressions. Some notes on depend types: http://axisofeval.blogspot.com/2010/10/notes-on-dependent-types.html http://axisofeval.blogspot.com/2010/10/notes-on-dependent-ty...