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

Re: Symbolics vs stock hardware

    Date: Sun, 19 Feb 89 14:31 EST
    From: Qobi@ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU (Jeffrey Mark Siskind)

	So, yes, curious as it may sound, the only thing that would make
	Symbolics machines useful to me into the indefinite future would be a
	high-quality Scheme implementation.  I wonder if any other customers
	consider this a priority?

    Jonathan Rees has a Scheme compiler for the 3600. I have never used it
    so I can't comment on its quality. Actually I would very much like
    the plain 3600 Common Lisp compiler to support tail recursion (and
    continuations as well --- though the latter would require some
    extensions to the language.) Many times I have taken to writing loops
    instead of tail recursive calls solely for performance reasons and
    would like to be able to stop that practise.

Yes, but this scheme only supports continuations DOWNWARD, when what we need
here are true DYNAMIC/NON-LEXICAL continuations... (i.e. dynamic closures)

INTERLISP allows one to copy the stack into a var and back, which is close
to this, it just doesn't copy the state of all the globals. Even so, this
would be a lot easier to use than stack-groups for this particular
application. Any chance of the stack being opened to such user access?

Brad Miller		U. Rochester Comp Sci Dept.
miller@cs.rochester.edu {...allegra!rochester!miller}