[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re2: MCL Framework & Direction
- To: HOHMANN@ZUG.CSMIL.UMICH.EDU, INFO-MCL@CAMBRIDGE.APPLE.COM
- Subject: Re2: MCL Framework & Direction
- From: D1104@AppleLink.Apple.COM (Computer SW Consult, J Stulin,PAS)
- Date: 25 Jun 92 16:25 GMT
You are correct; we will always want more memory, disk, and cpu power, and C++
will always be more lean and mean than Lisp. But consider this:
1) The price of software development continues to grow, the cost of hardware
resources contiunues to collapse. MCL development is orders of magnitude
cheaper than C++ development and always will be, even when the next generation
of C++ development systems become available.
2) More and more of the "stuff" in a computer application which requires
serious processing is given to us in the form of efficient routines or class
libraries (e.g. o/s calls, Application Framework, hooks to Quicktime, etc.).
3) Dylan, and a good application class library for Dylan, are vaporware. MCL is
4) It is not impossible that one class library can be created that will, with
simple translations, work for both Dylan and MCL.