3 ms·

No, they had the luxury of having much more.

pjmlp 2y ago
Learn computing history, starting with Lisp REPLs on IBM 704 in 1958! 20 years later we had 64 KB to fit an whole OS and applications on home computers.
- amszmidt 2y ago
  I am quite aware of computer history. The Xerox Alto had between 90k and 512k of memory, and a disk drive that managed 2.5M. Lisp Machines required a 80M disk with at least 512k of memory. Neither Smalltalk nor Lisp fit in 64k in 1980 (~20 years later). Even the IBM 7094 which ran a very tiny Lisp (1.5) had around 32k 36bit words.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    Unless I got my math wrong, 32 is less than 80. Also where did I on my comment mentioned Lisp Machines?
    - amszmidt 2y ago
      "20 years later" -- nobody was running IBM 705 in 1980 for Lisp or Smalltalk. The 7601 was backed by hard disk as well. These machines used quite a bit of paging. You are purposefully confusing multiple decades of computing. Smalltalk was much later, and required quite large machines, so did Lisp when it became popular on machines like the PDP-10 and ITS which had much more memory, just running Macsyma was a PITA.
      - anthk 2y ago
        Macsyma on the Simh emulator, Ka10, appears to do it fine under ITS.
        amszmidt 2y ago
        Your not sharing the system with a dozen other people running Emacs and Macsyma :-)
        pjmlp 2y ago
        Timesharing wasn't part of the discussion.
      - pjmlp 2y ago
        We were Lisp on CP/M, ever heard of it? Also now we are getting MMU and page loading into the argument?
        anthk 2y ago
        Could Macsyma be run on CP/M on an Altair?
        pjmlp 2y ago
        There were other Z80 computers able to run Lisp and CP/M. Here he goes again with another application I didn't mention at all.
        amszmidt 2y ago
        And CP/M wasn’t running the first versions of Lisp or Smalltalk. Your claim that Lisp and Smalltalk didn’t have the luxury of 80k when they got invented, when intact they did. Much of the programs that ranusing Lisp specifically was VERY memory hungry. Now your just arguing for the sake of arguing and just being antagonizing. Have fun.
  - xkriva11 2y ago
    The very first version of Smalltalk was written in BASIC on Data General Nova. Then, in 1983, there was a version of Lisp for ZX Spectrum (which had 48k of RAM and no floppy). There was also Rosetta Smalltalk: > ROSETTA SMALLTALK now runs on the Exidy Sorcerer computer! It requires 48K of memory, a disk, and CP/M.
    - amszmidt 2y ago
      True, the absolutley first versions were entirely unusable. Glacial is what one of the authors said. First version of Unix had a 512k disk pack, and no shell -- that 80k binary for shell would have been a dream. "20 years later we had 64 KB to fit an whole OS and applications on home computers." is quite the claim when we are talking about Unix, Lisp or Smalltalk and comparing them to CP/M with DOS which .. does nothing in comparison, and ignoring literally all other aspects of a computer system.

Learn computing history, starting with Lisp REPLs on IBM 704 in 1958! 20 years later we had 64 KB to fit an whole OS and applications on home computers.

amszmidt 2y ago
I am quite aware of computer history. The Xerox Alto had between 90k and 512k of memory, and a disk drive that managed 2.5M. Lisp Machines required a 80M disk with at least 512k of memory. Neither Smalltalk nor Lisp fit in 64k in 1980 (~20 years later). Even the IBM 7094 which ran a very tiny Lisp (1.5) had around 32k 36bit words.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  Unless I got my math wrong, 32 is less than 80. Also where did I on my comment mentioned Lisp Machines?
  - amszmidt 2y ago
    "20 years later" -- nobody was running IBM 705 in 1980 for Lisp or Smalltalk. The 7601 was backed by hard disk as well. These machines used quite a bit of paging. You are purposefully confusing multiple decades of computing. Smalltalk was much later, and required quite large machines, so did Lisp when it became popular on machines like the PDP-10 and ITS which had much more memory, just running Macsyma was a PITA.
    - anthk 2y ago
      Macsyma on the Simh emulator, Ka10, appears to do it fine under ITS.
      - amszmidt 2y ago
        Your not sharing the system with a dozen other people running Emacs and Macsyma :-)
        pjmlp 2y ago
        Timesharing wasn't part of the discussion.
    - pjmlp 2y ago
      We were Lisp on CP/M, ever heard of it? Also now we are getting MMU and page loading into the argument?
      - anthk 2y ago
        Could Macsyma be run on CP/M on an Altair?
        pjmlp 2y ago
        There were other Z80 computers able to run Lisp and CP/M. Here he goes again with another application I didn't mention at all.
      - amszmidt 2y ago
        And CP/M wasn’t running the first versions of Lisp or Smalltalk. Your claim that Lisp and Smalltalk didn’t have the luxury of 80k when they got invented, when intact they did. Much of the programs that ranusing Lisp specifically was VERY memory hungry. Now your just arguing for the sake of arguing and just being antagonizing. Have fun.
- xkriva11 2y ago
  The very first version of Smalltalk was written in BASIC on Data General Nova. Then, in 1983, there was a version of Lisp for ZX Spectrum (which had 48k of RAM and no floppy). There was also Rosetta Smalltalk: > ROSETTA SMALLTALK now runs on the Exidy Sorcerer computer! It requires 48K of memory, a disk, and CP/M.
  - amszmidt 2y ago
    True, the absolutley first versions were entirely unusable. Glacial is what one of the authors said. First version of Unix had a 512k disk pack, and no shell -- that 80k binary for shell would have been a dream. "20 years later we had 64 KB to fit an whole OS and applications on home computers." is quite the claim when we are talking about Unix, Lisp or Smalltalk and comparing them to CP/M with DOS which .. does nothing in comparison, and ignoring literally all other aspects of a computer system.