1 files changed, 0 insertions, 42 deletions
diff --git a/cm/ex03.cm b/cm/ex03.cm
deleted file mode 100644
index 417799f..0000000
--- a/cm/ex03.cm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,42 +0,0 @@
-// Hypothetical, fully ledged version of Cm, at compile time, using a superset of the runtime language
-// with macros, and an escape hatch into native code (C or whatever)
-
-// Language structurally, a bit like Nim:
-// - the scripting language itself
-// - macros, which are functions from language itself operating on special AST values at compile time
-// - (NEW) native escape hatch, kind of literate programming style, expanding into native program source code at compile time
-
-// So the compile procedure is as follows:
-// - build interpreter (native source code) from source
-// - init interpreter
-// - load program source code, evaluate to produce
-//   - an environment image (bytecode of scripting constructs), and
-//   - native program source (text of things produced by native escape hatch, plus interpreter source code itself, plus auto generated bindings)
-// - build native program
-// And run procedure is:
-// - init interpreter (<- the PE/mach-o/ELF entrypoint here)
-// - init native program parts (<- i.e. the escape hatches don't generate an actual main() func, instead a customly named init() func that gets called by the generated machinery)
-// - load bindings
-// - load environment image
-// - run native program entrypoint
-// The order of native program entrypoint vs. environment loading might be reversed. Depending on how it makes sense.
-// Or maybe there will be 2 parts, the native program *init* and *start*. Former would be like the _mainCRTStartup() that initializes global variables, etc.
-
-// REQUIREMENT FOR NATIVE PROGRAM SOURCE:
-// Must be nicely readable.
-// We plan on completely reusing the traditional native program debuggers, e.g. GDB for debugging
-// The interpreter can then have its own debugging system
-// Problem: How to do mixed language debugging? like stepping into a native function, this is a lot of work/hacks to wrap on top of e.g. GDB
-// SIDE THOUGHT:
-// should bindings be baked into the environment image (i.e. design the bytecode format to include this? however it should be done; can't really imagine it now?)
-// or should they be generated e.g. `bind_function("func_name", &func_written_in_C);`?
-
-// REUSING EXSITING SCRIPTING LANGUAGE
-// We don't want to reimplement a language from scratch
-// Hacking e.g. PUC-Lua's parser? Kind of like Terra
-
-// terminology akin to Janet (from _Janet for Mortals_):
-// compile: evaluating the program sources to produce an environment
-// runtime: evaluating the environment
-
-