[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
More On Impenetrable Images
- To: "Common Lisp" <email@example.com>
- Subject: More On Impenetrable Images
- From: "Steve Casner" <Steve_Casner@qmgate.arc.nasa.gov>
- Date: 22 Sep 1994 10:45:04 U
- Cc: Steve_Casner@qmgate.arc.nasa.gov
Reply to: More On Impenetrable Images
> Look at the BinHex example in the file "ccl:examples;binhex;binhex.lisp".
This is a rather low-level answer to very high-level question. I know that
the wizard developers of MCL x.0 are not responsible for positioning and
promoting MCL in the marketplace, and that this question should probably be
put to management directly. It's probably worth posing here also. This is
not a flame, just an idea, offered by many others before, whose time has
probably arrived. Here goes:
Suppose I was trying to convince a senior vice president of the world's
largest airplane manufacturer that MCL x.0 and Macintosh were viable
platforms to build the next generation of airline industry computer-based
trainers (486, C++, and Authorware now totally dominate the industry). I
talk about the promise of intelligent tutoring, student modeling, contextual
help and how these emerging technologies have literally been founded on Lisp.
His curiosity aroused, he, along with a staff of well-seasoned and
terrifyingly critical technical people, start asking questions like: Can you
deliver stable, secure, and serious application-grade software in Lisp? Will
our proprietary aircraft performance data, or student pilot progress data be
at risk? EVEN IF all the answers are contained in the file:
"ccl:examples;binhex;binhex.lisp", printing out a copy for him probably won't
There needs to be rigorous and defensible "party line" answers to these
questions and party-line solutions visibly published in the open literature.
MCLx.0 needs to roll out the red carpet for serious developers and make their
managers feel confident about choosing it.
Computer-based trainers in the airline industry now consist of a series of
static pictures and diagrams presented in succession by pushing a button
marked "Continue." Mature technology that goes beyond this paradigm is here
now, most of it the product of hard work done by Lisp-hacking thinkers. If
Adam Smith was right, we will see it all in the marketplace soon. It's just
a question of whose going to have all the fun, get all the credit, and make
all the money.
Date: 9/22/1994 8:31 AM
To: Steve Casner
From: Bill St. Clair
At 3:09 PM 9/21/94 +0000, Steve Casner wrote:
> Subject: Time:2:41 PM
> OFFICE MEMO impenetrable images? Date:9/21/1994
>There have been a few recent postings that have asked how one goes about
>getting rid of the Listener in application versions. This is a serious
>question for MCL developers who will distribute applications that contain
>source code and data that they need to protect. Generally, if I can somehow
>get the Listener to appear, I can start snooping around. Guessing the names
>of functions or data objects usually isn't all that difficult. Functions
>might be reversed-engineered through testing, the contents of data objects
>If MCL is to be regarded as a serious development language, there needs to
>a standard way of making sure that Listeners cannot be dug up,
>or created anew. What's the solution?
Look at the BinHex example in the file "ccl:examples;binhex;binhex.lisp".
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
Received: by qmgate.arc.nasa.gov with SMTP;22 Sep 1994 08:31:27 U
Received: from ministry.cambridge.apple.com by brazil.cambridge.apple.com
with SMTP (5.64/25-eef)
id AA03220; Thu, 22 Sep 94 11:25:57 -0400
Received: from bill-s.cambridge.apple.com by cambridge.apple.com with SMTP
id AA25329; Thu, 22 Sep 94 11:26:05 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 11:29:06 -0500
To: "Steve Casner" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Common Lisp" <email@example.com>
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Bill St. Clair)
Subject: Re: impenetrable images?