🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6592@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) writes:


   From ted@nmsu.edu (Ted Dunning):
   > one of the problems is that an in parameter is still a reference which
   > must be accounted for.  since there is no mechanism to handle
   > initialization distinct from assignment, it is difficult to write a
   > robust reference counting collection mechanism.

       OK, I agree.  Nobody ever does this anyway, and I can't imagine
       why anyone would want to. 

it is done commonly and easily in c++.

   > hmmmm..... seems to me that mister wolfe hasn't done much lisp
   > programming if he thinks that lisp has no concept of data typing.
   > perhaps he should read CLtL a bit.  particularly chapter 2 (data
   > types), chapter 4 (type specifiers), section 6.2 (data type
   > predicates), chapter 9 (declarations), as well as chapters 12, 13, 14,
   > 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 which describe the builtin data types and type
   > extension methods available to the common lisp programmer.

       OK, I'm not up on the very latest versions of Lisp (of which I
       hear that there are many).  How about multitasking capabilities?


trivial and lucid in lisps that support continuations and/or engines.

try scheme, allegro common lisp, symbolics common lisp, or xerox's
interlisp offerings.  if you want to play, grab a copy of one of the
pd interepreters from the net.
--
ted@nmsu.edu
			remember, when extensions and subsets are outlawed,
			only outlaws will have extensions or subsets