Newsgroups: alt.lang.design,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!hookup!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!NewsWatcher!user
From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker)
Subject: Re: Comparing productivity: LisP against C++ (was Re: Reference Counting)
Message-ID: <hbaker-1601952306420001@192.0.2.1>
Sender: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry G. Baker)
Organization: nil
References: <19941203T221402Z.enag@naggum.no> <LGM.94Dec5075553@polaris.ih.att.com> <D0CLt9.6K3@research.att.com> <BUFF.94Dec15103904@pravda.world> <D0xAIp.3Dn@rheged.dircon.co.uk> <vrotneyD11MDv.Ks7@netcom.com> <KARL.95Jan13010415@bagpuss.demon.co.uk> <hbaker-1401951022360001@192.0.2.1> <vrotneyD2HwK6.HEB@netcom.com> <3fdunb$lr8@news.panix.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:03:30 GMT
Lines: 27
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:107807 comp.lang.lisp:16396

In article <3fdunb$lr8@news.panix.com>, Viktor Yurkovsky
<n4mation@panix.com> wrote:

> Forgive me for butting in into the middle of a discussion, but I would
> like to voice a couple of opinions.
> 
> 1, Syntax of the language matters very little.
>    ===========================================

Agreed, unless the language is Lisp.  In that case, you can use the full
power of macros to write most of the code for you in Lisp.  In this case,
the simple syntax matters a lot.

> 2. It is the compile time that REALLY MATTERS.
>    ------------------------------------------

Agreed, at least for the bulk of the development and testing phases.

I heard one horror story about a system in Ada in which it took 1
solid week (yes, approx. 170 hours) to recompile the system.  They quickly
reinvented binary patching (sigh.....)

(But linking can't take that long, you say?  You've never tried to 'link'
an Ada program; it oftentimes calls the compiler again!)

Before C++'ers get too smug -- just start using templates heavily, and
you'll find out the hard way, too.
