[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

SELECTQ efficiency?

    Date: 2 August 1981 11:59-EDT
    From: George J. Carrette <GJC at MIT-MC>
    . . . 
    That fact that you were later able to get a more winning version
    from GSB does not support redemption. [Seriously folks, name any
    feature in maclisp, and you can get a more winning version from GSB.
    . . .]
Since LSB'S SELECTQ, which I corrected for minor bugs,  *never*  had any 
bugs in the installed version, and was adequately efficient even in its 
middle versions, then can you explain why you should clog all our mail 
files with these continuing complaints? 

I shouldn't be surprised if someone could find a case that, ** even
now **, could be slightly improved.