Are there really separate programming paradigms? I don't believe so.

My most recent post has sparked some debate. I thought I'd put my money where my mouth is and try to define type.

Have you ever noticed how most text when discussing computer sciences concepts fails miserably to properly define the terms they discuss?

I haven't been posting as much at Artima lately, but I have been posting a fair amount of questions and ideas at Lambda-the-Ultimate.org.

I am looking to name a new operation in the Cat programming language.

There is a debate raging at the Lambda-the-Ultimate.com site about closures in Java. Here's my two cents on the subject.

I am playing with the idea of allowing types to pushed onto the stack in the Cat language. Here are my ruminations on the subject

I talk about my experience at having presented at the Lang. NET 2006 symposium.

I am wondering out loud whether a contract can be completely expressed as a type (or type class) in a language with a sufficiently advanced type system.

I'm presenting the Cat programming language at Lang. NET 2006 today. The slides are now online.

Yes and no.

Two of the cardinal sins of programming are overspecification and underspecification. Today I will discuss the one most programmers are guilty of: overspecification.

The next version of the Cat programming language, contains namespaces and type annotations.

Here is a challenge, try to define what a programming language is.

A macro pre-processor which works as a type-aware pattern matcher can be used to transform language X into another language Y. In other words you could create a domain specific language from another language.