User talk:Dkf: Difference between revisions

: Alas, there's quite a few places where I've done it, far more than I stand any chance of remembering. (You'll have to go through and check all the tasks implemented by Icon. Sorry. Can't be more than a few hundred… :-)) However, I'd encourage working on example showing the ''difference'' between Icon and Unicon; my impression has been of a lot of noise (by comparison with neat use of the {{tmpl|works with}} template) and no distinctiveness. Is Unicon an implementation or dialect of Icon? (If it's the latter, we might need to reconsider how RC handles dialects; up to now, it's been usual to treat them as implementations, but that's not exactly correct when there's only a partial distinction between the language and the implementation of that language, which is all too common. That'd be something for the Village Pump…) –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 18:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

:: A dialect is probably closest. Unicon is a super-set of most of Icon. There are a frew Iconisms that won't work the same way in Unicon. I recently revised the way I want to present the two (described in the Unicon talk pages as [[Category_talk:Unicon#How_to_reasonably_handle_Icon_.v._Union_similarities_and_differences]]. It may work for other close dialects as well. --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 17:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)