[Icfp04-discuss] why we, the organizers, did not provide a simulator

[Jed Davis]

Michael Levin <milevin at saul.cis.upenn.edu> writes:

> *) A source implementation would favor a particular source
>    language -- not good;

Of course, people writing in some flavor of ML could use much of the
pseudocode from the problem description, given some fairly minor edits
(switch -> match, etc.).  Hmm... camlp4, anyone?

> *) Some participants actually found writing the simulator and
>    visualizer enjoyable;

I enjoyed it so much, I'm writing the simulator again in a different
language!  Well, OK, it's also because I want it to take less than a
minute to run a pair of games, and because I don't want to have to
maintain my unreadable Forth code.  (Seriously, though, I really did
enjoy it.)


-- 
dn: cn=Jed Davis, o=panix.com  ##          see also jldavis at cs.oberlin.edu
objectclass: person
mail;personal: jdev at panix.com  ##    PGP Key FP:   A098 903E 9B9A DEF4 168F
mail;work:     jld@/           ##  [id 0xF33659F9] AA09 BF07 807E F336 59F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 185 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.seas.upenn.edu/pipermail/icfp04-discuss/attachments/20040608/a485c106/attachment-0001.bin