4 ms·

That was really not the case, there are many misconceptions about the architecture of the Lisp Machine. The CADR for example is a very simple machine, and has

That was really not the case, there are many misconceptions about the architecture of the Lisp Machine. The CADR for example is a very simple machine, and has no knowledge of OO or methods, likewise for the Lisp Machine macrocode.

mepian 3y ago
You keep pretending that the CADR is the only Lisp machine, while it’s basically a throwaway prototype for the real deal that was being implemented at Symbolics. ;) There are no misconceptions in my post. The CADR software already included Flavors, which is what I meant. The Ivory definitely had the method dispatch optimisations.
- amszmidt 3y ago
  There was nothing "prototype" or "throwaway" about the CADR, it was heavily used at the AI lab for over 10 years, with both the Lambda and 3600 heavily based on it, to the point that the Lambda was microcode source and Lisp FASL compatible with it. The CADR "software" does not include "Flavors" -- that is part of the Lisp Machine operating system (which for a large of its life was shared between the CADR and Lambda, and even partially for the 3600 series), which is just plain Lisp and unrelated to hardware. None of TI or Symbolics machines had these type of optimisations that you mention. The Ivory did not have any special method dispatching optimisations. The Explorer was basically a Lambda.
  - mepian 3y ago
    Yes, it’s a throwaway prototype that overstayed its welcome for over 10 years, as it tends to happen in computing all the time. You said it yourself elsewhere that it’s a grad project. You are nitpicking here as usual. The point is that OOP was something expected to be available on Lisp machines. Okay, I will spoon-feed you. Open the specification on Bitsavers and search for “4.7 Generic Function and Message Passing”.
    - amszmidt 3y ago
      I'm quite familiar, I've restored and written simulators and implemented FPGAs for almost all of them in various states of disarray. Your claim was that they had special architecture optimisations, that was not the case, and a common misconception -- your quite condescending tone notwithstanding. OOP was indeed available, but it was software -- just like in CL, and not backed by hardware, and essentially the same way it is done today.
      - tiberious726 3y ago
        And we never actually got the LMI K-Machine, which was planned to have some of the special hardware people think they all had
        amszmidt 3y ago
        The K-Machine would be a super interesting retro-computing project to get going. The schematics, the Lisp Machine system associated for it, are available (I'm unsure of legal status). If anyone is interested in driving that, I'd be really interested to help (but my primary interest is just the CADR due to lack of hours in the day :-) ) Here is a wonderful article about the K-Machine: http://fare.tunes.org/tmp/emergent/kmachine.htm http://fare.tunes.org/tmp/emergent/kmachine.htm

mepian 3y ago

You keep pretending that the CADR is the only Lisp machine, while it’s basically a throwaway prototype for the real deal that was being implemented at Symbolics. ;) There are no misconceptions in my post. The CADR software already included Flavors, which is what I meant. The Ivory definitely had the method dispatch optimisations.

amszmidt 3y ago
There was nothing "prototype" or "throwaway" about the CADR, it was heavily used at the AI lab for over 10 years, with both the Lambda and 3600 heavily based on it, to the point that the Lambda was microcode source and Lisp FASL compatible with it. The CADR "software" does not include "Flavors" -- that is part of the Lisp Machine operating system (which for a large of its life was shared between the CADR and Lambda, and even partially for the 3600 series), which is just plain Lisp and unrelated to hardware. None of TI or Symbolics machines had these type of optimisations that you mention. The Ivory did not have any special method dispatching optimisations. The Explorer was basically a Lambda.
- mepian 3y ago
  Yes, it’s a throwaway prototype that overstayed its welcome for over 10 years, as it tends to happen in computing all the time. You said it yourself elsewhere that it’s a grad project. You are nitpicking here as usual. The point is that OOP was something expected to be available on Lisp machines. Okay, I will spoon-feed you. Open the specification on Bitsavers and search for “4.7 Generic Function and Message Passing”.
  - amszmidt 3y ago
    I'm quite familiar, I've restored and written simulators and implemented FPGAs for almost all of them in various states of disarray. Your claim was that they had special architecture optimisations, that was not the case, and a common misconception -- your quite condescending tone notwithstanding. OOP was indeed available, but it was software -- just like in CL, and not backed by hardware, and essentially the same way it is done today.
    - tiberious726 3y ago
      And we never actually got the LMI K-Machine, which was planned to have some of the special hardware people think they all had
      - amszmidt 3y ago
        The K-Machine would be a super interesting retro-computing project to get going. The schematics, the Lisp Machine system associated for it, are available (I'm unsure of legal status). If anyone is interested in driving that, I'd be really interested to help (but my primary interest is just the CADR due to lack of hours in the day :-) ) Here is a wonderful article about the K-Machine: http://fare.tunes.org/tmp/emergent/kmachine.htm http://fare.tunes.org/tmp/emergent/kmachine.htm