3 ms·

I don't get it. Sussman says Lisp can't handle it, need to use C, Greenspun proposes to use Common Lisp instead, then Sussman insists Lisp can do it. Can someo

by meric 15y ago

I don't get it. Sussman says Lisp can't handle it, need to use C, Greenspun proposes to use Common Lisp instead, then Sussman insists Lisp can do it. Can someone explain how I've misread it?

rntz 15y ago
Sussman says Lisp can't do it, need to use C; Greenspun proposes Common Lisp; Sussman says that if that's true (if CL can do it but Scheme can't), then Scheme has been a waste of time (an odd conclusion IMO); Greenspun proves that CL can do it; Bill Rozas points out that the problem is in Scheme's inefficient reader implementation, not an inherent problem with Scheme itself.
- hapless 15y ago
  Let's see if I have this right. I could be wrong about the details here: Before it was called "Scheme," Sussman was writing papers about a lisp subset that could be optimized. Some folks tried to write an optimizing compiler, known as "T." http://mumble.net/~jar/tproject/ http://mumble.net/~jar/tproject/ Common Lisp was a superset of a bunch of vendor Lisp systems, even more monstrously complex than any individual vendor Lisp. So if I follow the author: If a CL implementation was indeed faster and better-optimized than the simpler Scheme dialect, then what was the purpose of Scheme?
  - groovy2shoes 15y ago
    The initial purpose of Scheme was to implement Hewitt's Actor model in Lisp. Steele and Sussman realized that "actors" were the same as lexical closures [1]. The Lambda Papers [2] describe the early implementation details of Scheme, and it was these papers that influenced the development of T [3]. [1] "The History of Scheme" http://labs.oracle.com/projects/plrg/JAOO-SchemeHistory-2006public.pdf http://labs.oracle.com/projects/plrg/JAOO-SchemeHistory-2006... [2] "The Lambda Papers" http://library.readscheme.org/page1.html http://library.readscheme.org/page1.html [3] "History of T" http://www.paulgraham.com/thist.html http://www.paulgraham.com/thist.html

by meric 15y ago

I don't get it. Sussman says Lisp can't handle it, need to use C, Greenspun proposes to use Common Lisp instead, then Sussman insists Lisp can do it. Can someone explain how I've misread it?

rntz 15y ago

Sussman says Lisp can't do it, need to use C; Greenspun proposes Common Lisp; Sussman says that if that's true (if CL can do it but Scheme can't), then Scheme has been a waste of time (an odd conclusion IMO); Greenspun proves that CL can do it; Bill Rozas points out that the problem is in Scheme's inefficient reader implementation, not an inherent problem with Scheme itself.

hapless 15y ago
Let's see if I have this right. I could be wrong about the details here: Before it was called "Scheme," Sussman was writing papers about a lisp subset that could be optimized. Some folks tried to write an optimizing compiler, known as "T." http://mumble.net/~jar/tproject/ http://mumble.net/~jar/tproject/ Common Lisp was a superset of a bunch of vendor Lisp systems, even more monstrously complex than any individual vendor Lisp. So if I follow the author: If a CL implementation was indeed faster and better-optimized than the simpler Scheme dialect, then what was the purpose of Scheme?
- groovy2shoes 15y ago
  The initial purpose of Scheme was to implement Hewitt's Actor model in Lisp. Steele and Sussman realized that "actors" were the same as lexical closures [1]. The Lambda Papers [2] describe the early implementation details of Scheme, and it was these papers that influenced the development of T [3]. [1] "The History of Scheme" http://labs.oracle.com/projects/plrg/JAOO-SchemeHistory-2006public.pdf http://labs.oracle.com/projects/plrg/JAOO-SchemeHistory-2006... [2] "The Lambda Papers" http://library.readscheme.org/page1.html http://library.readscheme.org/page1.html [3] "History of T" http://www.paulgraham.com/thist.html http://www.paulgraham.com/thist.html