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

RE: application framework

>>The compromises that are made in coding for C++ could cripple a lisp
>>application framework.

Much of the MCL implementation and interface class library is coded in
langauges other than LISP. There is no reason why a CLOS based interface to a
foreign class library would need to be crippling to LISP based applications.

>Cross language portability is a wierd concept to me.  Does anyone really
>want this?  I'd rather wait and hope that MCL itself (with the help
>of this application framework) is sufficient to develop an application.

This is how all compilers work.  I'm thinking that future C++ development
environments will resemble MCL, and may even need to translate C++ to LISP 
in order to provide the dynamic linking and memory management that LISP

>I don't think lisp will ever be suitable for writing an init, da, or
>microsoft word. 

That doesn't mean that developers of Microsoft Word shouldn't benefit from the
advantages of LISP environment technology.