Reading through it, I'm unsure whether the VM is necessary or included. To me, 'unnecessary' and 'runs on it by default' seem slightly contradictory, or at least surprising. I don't have time to read through your source code right now, but if you're not running on your VM, what output do you produce? elf executables against the x86-64 Linux ABI?
I was also surprised that so many terms in your post have links to the definition in Wikipedia. After finishing the article and scrolling all the way down, I got to your paragraph that explained your rationale for doing so, so that's fair. However, I admit I expected these terms to link to some Verve documentation about that particular component or concept to explain details about your implementation. I realize that you may have a different audience in mind than, say, the Haskell or Python docs, but I wouldn't expect those sites to link to dictionary definitions at all.
Right now it runs on its own VM. What I meant by "the VM is no longer necessary" was that the language went from being dynamic (when I was just prototyping with lisp) to static (in the current state), so it should be easy to generate machine code ahead of time, instead of having an interpreter (or adding a JIT).
The reason the definitions link to Wikipedia is that this is the first piece of documentation on Verve ever. Hopefully I'll be able to cover most of it in proper docs later, but I thought for now I'd add the link to the definitions in case someone reading through was not familiar with them (I personally hate to stop reading to start googling for acronyms).
Reading through it, I'm unsure whether the VM is necessary or included. To me, 'unnecessary' and 'runs on it by default' seem slightly contradictory, or at least surprising. I don't have time to read through your source code right now, but if you're not running on your VM, what output do you produce? elf executables against the x86-64 Linux ABI?
I was also surprised that so many terms in your post have links to the definition in Wikipedia. After finishing the article and scrolling all the way down, I got to your paragraph that explained your rationale for doing so, so that's fair. However, I admit I expected these terms to link to some Verve documentation about that particular component or concept to explain details about your implementation. I realize that you may have a different audience in mind than, say, the Haskell or Python docs, but I wouldn't expect those sites to link to dictionary definitions at all.
Thanks for posting!