Re: why is tree-shaking hard?

[smcl@sytex.com (Scott McLoughlin)]

Steven Ritter <sr0o+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> It may be possible to build a Lisp that relies on runtime libraries in
> this way (and, if so, I hope someone does it) but as of now, Lisp is not
> practical in a compound-document world.
> 
> Steve
> 

Howdy,

Has anyone done any research on doing this, e.i., splitting Common Lisp
into a kernel + libraries.  The idea is mentioned/suggested many times
here on this newsgroup. What goes in the kernel. What goes in the
libraries. What are the "bootstrap" issues. Is the design better
facillitated by the addition of more primitives (I'm thinking of
the SEQUENCES rats nest) specialized to certain data types. How
is debugging "folded" into a system. Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. 

If such work has not been done rigourously, maybe someone can squeeze
a Masters/PhD thesis out of it ;-)  Inquiring minds want to know.

=============================================
Scott McLoughlin
Conscious Computing
=============================================