Use of *RSET, and your conjectures

[Jon L White <JONL at MIT-MC>]

    Date: 27 October 1981 19:46-EST
    From: George J. Carrette <GJC at MIT-MC>
    If you think it is reasonable to have factors of 60 difference in
    speed with the bit and string primitives depending on *RSET, ...
I never implied anything at all like that -- only the worst case (which
you were carping about) admits such large error-checking time.  
VASLAP uses NIBBLE and SET-NIBBLE which are much different (as I told 
you in my previous note).  There is no reason to run a debugged compiler 
in *RSET mode -- only the expansion of user macros and the interpretation 
of user code need to be so protected.  Thus Interpreters, like MacSYMA 
are correct in doing this;  but assemblers, like VASLAP, don't run random 
code, and when they are fairly well debugged don't need *RSET for their 
own protection.
    ...
    JONL, the reason all the "NILCOM" stuff you wrote had to be
    reimplemented was to gain correctness and reliability.
I disagree with your opinion as to why you re-did some of the semantics
your own way.  This is a nasty way of justifying your independent
actions.