[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PCL benchmark
- To: Stan Lanning <Lanning.pa@Xerox.COM>, Chris Burdorf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: PCL benchmark
- From: Jeff Dalton <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 88 17:50:07 BST
- Cc: CommonLoops.PA@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: Stan Lanning's message of 10 Oct 88 16:57 PDT
- Redistributed: CommonLoops.PA
> I think you may be confusing CLOS with PCL (something that we all did at
> the workshop, I'm afraid). The discusions at the workshop regarding
> performance were about reasonable performance expectations for PCL *in the
> (near) future*. These performance expectations in turn are not as good as
> "native" implementations (like the TI version) that was also discussed.
Is the TI version a complete, working, available system? If so,
on which machines? Does it depend on special hardware? Are there
any *other* native implementations? On stock hardware?
Unfortunately, most people have to base their view of CLOS on PCL
because it's the only version for stock hardware they've seen.