Newsgroups: comp.lang.beta,comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!yeshua.marcam.com!uunet!sytex!smcl
From: smcl@sytex.com (Scott McLoughlin)
Subject: Re: Comparison: Beta - Lisp
Message-ID: <os2Psc1w165w@sytex.com>
Sender: bbs@sytex.com
Organization: Sytex Access Ltd.
References: <LYNBECH.94Sep15223604@xenon.daimi.aau.dk>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 1994 01:25:11 GMT
Lines: 32
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.beta:54 comp.lang.lisp:14695

lynbech@xenon.daimi.aau.dk (Christian Lynbech) writes:

> Jeff> I'd say it's neither.
> 
> Are we about to open the `C vs. Lisp' thread again, with BETA on the
> side?
> 
> (for those puzzled: this has been a raging debate for the last couple
> of months in comp.lang.lisp)
> 
> 
> 

Howdy,
        Sure let's open it up again ;-) But no really -- skip all this
talk of "realtime" this and that and concerns about competing with
Fortran on floating point.  I'm still _VERY_ curious (concerned?)
about why Lisp isn't more popular in "the trenches". Go look at 
Borland C++ compiler's output in large model (typical Windows app) -
not too slick. Now go run a typical Windows app (or Unix workstation
app for that matter).  It pages like all get out when you open a 
windows or switch to another task. Now go install a Windows 
_personal utility app_ -- 40 meg disk footprint or more. We're
not talking big DB servers, just a nice word processor or 
spreadsheet.
        So why don't folks use Lisp to write this stuff? Blazing
speed,space,etc. aint that critical. What gives?

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