[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Base/ibase
- To: (BUG LISP) at MIT-AI The obvious answer is compatibility with the LISP machine and other lisp In any case, I don't see why it would be too hard to put the (SETQ BASE So why not consider it? This base 8 bit is at least as ridiculous as
- To: BUG-LISP at MIT-MC
- Subject: Re: Base/ibase
- From: DHD@MIT-AI
- From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK at MIT-MC>
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 79 15:28:15 GMT
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 79 16:03:00 GMT
- Cc: GSB at MIT-MC
- Original-date: 11/24/79 11:28:15 EDT
- Original-date: 24 November 1979 11:03-EST
- Sender: RWK0 at MIT-MC
The current Format is a loss, as we all know. It doesn't even KNOW about
~T, and ~& doesn't work right, etc...
GSB has a FORMAT that's as fully LISPM compatible as can be done, works well,
comes complete with excellent documentation (due to LSB) It takes only about
300 words more BPS than the current MacLisp default, etc. unless ~R, ~<, or ~C
are used, which autoloads another 700 words or so. I haven't done any speed
comparisons yet, but I'd expect GSB's to be at least comparable, if not
superior.
Do we want to make GSB's format autoload instead of the current one?
(Macsyma doesn't use FORMAT, so the space is less critical than it might be)
The disadvantages include the fact that it's written with LSB, which hurts
its exportability. On the other hand, it's so far superior to the current
one that I've always used it instead of the default one even in it's much
earlier and more primitive versions.