[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A Dylan implemented on Common Lisp
- To: info-mcl@digitool.com
- Subject: Re: A Dylan implemented on Common Lisp
- From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
- Date: 10 Mar 1995 16:01:28 +1100
- Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
- References: <3jirll$r0g@cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu>, <gclement-0903950833460001@155.50.21.58>, <3jn4cu$dsi@kernighan.cs.umass.edu>
- Sender: owner-info-mcl@digitool.com
In article <gclement-0903950833460001@155.50.21.58> gclement@keps.com (Geoffrey Clements) writes:
>In Dylan I see a language that feels like a static language that has
>borrowed all the best features of Lisp. This makes it attractive as a more
>general programming language. A language like C makes a good application
>programming language. But try writting an expert system in it. Conversely,
>Lisp is a great language to write AI type programs in. But try writing a
>word processor with it.
My favourite editor was written in a language called POP-2, which you can
think of as Lisp with Pascal syntax. Recently, I have been doing some
statistical calculations. What language have I been using? Xlisp-Stat.
[See "Lisp-Stat, an Object-Oriented Environment for Statistical Computing
and Dynamic Graphics"; Luke Tierney; published by Wiley in 1990.]
One reason for using it: it's free.
Another reason for using it: I can use it on a PC, Mac, or UNIX+X system,
with none of the nasty porting problems I get with C code. (Note in
particular, the graphics stuff may not be flashy, but it's the _same_ on
all platforms. I don't have to know X or Mac Toolbox to program it.)
Another reason for using it: the system is extensible. I can easily build
new stuff using old components.
Another reason for using it: I _have_ written some of the stuff in C, but
all things considered, I've got more done in less time using XlispStat
on a macintosh (and I'm using the old version without even the byte-code
compiler, so we're talking _interpreted_ lisp on a 68020 here) than using
optimised C on a big SPARC. My time is as important as the computer's.
As for word processors specifically, the Xerox D-machines running Interlisp
(one integrated environment) included a word processor called TEdit that I
would still use if I could, and that was written entirely in Interlisp. It
was a very capable component for its size.
--
"The complex-type shall be a simple-type." ISO 10206:1991 (Extended Pascal)
Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.