3 ms·

This is true, of course, but our point is that there is not a lot of stuff separating the lisp from the machine -- no OS for instance. It's just a machine that

by antics 13y ago

This is true, of course, but our point is that there is not a lot of stuff separating the lisp from the machine -- no OS for instance. It's just a machine that runs lisp and nothing else.

lispm 13y ago
I think its fine and a good project. I was once using Lisp on my Apple IIc. Generally a Lisp Machine is also really a piece of hardware designed to run Lisp. The CPU of a Symbolics for example is a (mostly) stack machine which knows all kinds of Lisp data types and Lisp function calling conventions. The memory then also contains Lisp data (with tags for data types and GC which are used by the CPU directly). Additionally the Lisp that runs on top of it is providing OS services: device control, I/O, keyboard, disks, tapes, expansion cards, graphics, sound, network, scheduling, ... Getting a Lisp on an Apple II to the level of the built-in Apple Basic with access to keyboard, graphics, etc. should be fun. I'm looking forward to read more of your adventures!
- jordanb 13y ago
  Right. Lisp machines came out of the assumption that general purpose hardware would be very bad at running lisp, in an era where custom single-purpose computing hardware seemed to make sense. As it turned out, Unix workstations ran Lisp just fine. So when the 80s AI winter drying up budgets, AI labs decided to buy cheaper SUN workstations and the Lisp machine companies failed.
  - lispm 13y ago
    No, Lisp Machines came out of the assumption that there was no hardware to run AI development environments as personal workstations. The concept of the Lisp Machine dates back to the early seventies and the first machines appeared mid/end seventies. Lisp developers early on wanted to use the machines interactively. A single Lisp developer could use a PDP with something like Macsyma, which probably was thought to serve tens or hundreds of terminal users. And the memory of that machine was still constraining for Macsyma or some of the other larger Lisp programs. At that time there were no useful 32bit (or more) microprocessors. Other machines were either tiny or very large for multiple users. The 68000 appeared in 1979 and just was good enough to run the console of the Symbolics Lisp Machine a few years later. So Lisp Machines were developed to run a very compact machine code representation of Lisp and with very large main memories (1 Megabyte or more), graphical user interfaces and all that for a SINGLE user - a $100k per machine. Thus when they appeared on the commercial market in 1981, there was nothing like it. Ten years later lots of other processors were fast enough, had enough memory, and were available as capable personal computers or workstations. But initially 'general purpose' hardware was not especially good at running Lisp. The Intel chips were a bad match, the first 68000 was slow with tiny memories, ... It took a few years and the next generations were better: 68020, the SPARC, better Intel processors, ... But when Lisp Machines were designed at at Xerox/PARC (the Alto running Lisp in 1974, then InterLisp-D), at MIT (the CONS in 1975 and CADR), at BBN (the Jericho in 1979) general purpose hardware WAS unpractical for running Lisp, Lisp applications and their development environments. Later in the mid 80s the architectures were brought to microprocessors (TI Explorer Megachip, Symbolics Ivory). It was also tried to design RISC based chips: SPUR, Xerox, Symbolics, ... but then the market for Lisp went away.
    - VLM 13y ago
      "At that time there were no useful" A good post, and some other analogies I can think of are/were the concept of specialized "word processor" computers, specialized CAD stations, specialized gaming hardware... Pretty much if there was marketing material with words like "accelerator" "turbo" "extreme" it probably fits right in.
    - mjn 13y ago
      I agree w.r.t. the 1970s, but the Lisp Machines were having cost-competition issues even before the Intel/SPARC machines caught up, due to the advent of lower-cost, smallish minicomputers that could be used as single-user machines if you had the budget. By 1985 you could get a MicroVAX II for ~$20k, plus another ~$8k for a copy of VAX Lisp, and have a quite reasonable Lisp system, with the downside of having to store a reasonably big cabinet (but not full-VAX kind of big).
      - lispm 13y ago
        The basic MicroVAX II was quite slow, with tiny memory, just a text terminal interface, ... To get anything comparable to a Symbolics 3640 one would have to invest quite a bit more money and it would still be slower as an 11/780. The lab at our University was using a lot of Lisp on a DEC 10 and VAX 11/750 and 11/780. Nobody I know was keen to move their Lisp development to a Microvax (though there were some), There were some Symbolics 3640 users. Then later Apollo/SUN/Compaq/Mac II, ...
    - rbanffy 13y ago
      > So Lisp Machines were developed to run a very compact machine code representation of Lisp and with very large main memories (1 Megabyte or more), graphical user interfaces and all that for a SINGLE user - a $100k per machine. > Later in the mid 80s the architectures were brought to microprocessors I wonder when will someone build one onto an FPGA. It's the ultra-übergeek version of the Jeri Ellsworth's C-One.
      - sourceless 13y ago
        raises hand I'm currently reading all the papers/talking to people so I can design one (still torn between doing something historically accurate or modern, new, and potentially useful).
jff 13y ago
It's damn cool in any case, looking forward to future articles!

by antics 13y ago

This is true, of course, but our point is that there is not a lot of stuff separating the lisp from the machine -- no OS for instance. It's just a machine that runs lisp and nothing else.

lispm 13y ago

I think its fine and a good project. I was once using Lisp on my Apple IIc. Generally a Lisp Machine is also really a piece of hardware designed to run Lisp. The CPU of a Symbolics for example is a (mostly) stack machine which knows all kinds of Lisp data types and Lisp function calling conventions. The memory then also contains Lisp data (with tags for data types and GC which are used by the CPU directly). Additionally the Lisp that runs on top of it is providing OS services: device control, I/O, keyboard, disks, tapes, expansion cards, graphics, sound, network, scheduling, ... Getting a Lisp on an Apple II to the level of the built-in Apple Basic with access to keyboard, graphics, etc. should be fun. I'm looking forward to read more of your adventures!

jordanb 13y ago
Right. Lisp machines came out of the assumption that general purpose hardware would be very bad at running lisp, in an era where custom single-purpose computing hardware seemed to make sense. As it turned out, Unix workstations ran Lisp just fine. So when the 80s AI winter drying up budgets, AI labs decided to buy cheaper SUN workstations and the Lisp machine companies failed.
- lispm 13y ago
  No, Lisp Machines came out of the assumption that there was no hardware to run AI development environments as personal workstations. The concept of the Lisp Machine dates back to the early seventies and the first machines appeared mid/end seventies. Lisp developers early on wanted to use the machines interactively. A single Lisp developer could use a PDP with something like Macsyma, which probably was thought to serve tens or hundreds of terminal users. And the memory of that machine was still constraining for Macsyma or some of the other larger Lisp programs. At that time there were no useful 32bit (or more) microprocessors. Other machines were either tiny or very large for multiple users. The 68000 appeared in 1979 and just was good enough to run the console of the Symbolics Lisp Machine a few years later. So Lisp Machines were developed to run a very compact machine code representation of Lisp and with very large main memories (1 Megabyte or more), graphical user interfaces and all that for a SINGLE user - a $100k per machine. Thus when they appeared on the commercial market in 1981, there was nothing like it. Ten years later lots of other processors were fast enough, had enough memory, and were available as capable personal computers or workstations. But initially 'general purpose' hardware was not especially good at running Lisp. The Intel chips were a bad match, the first 68000 was slow with tiny memories, ... It took a few years and the next generations were better: 68020, the SPARC, better Intel processors, ... But when Lisp Machines were designed at at Xerox/PARC (the Alto running Lisp in 1974, then InterLisp-D), at MIT (the CONS in 1975 and CADR), at BBN (the Jericho in 1979) general purpose hardware WAS unpractical for running Lisp, Lisp applications and their development environments. Later in the mid 80s the architectures were brought to microprocessors (TI Explorer Megachip, Symbolics Ivory). It was also tried to design RISC based chips: SPUR, Xerox, Symbolics, ... but then the market for Lisp went away.
  - VLM 13y ago
    "At that time there were no useful" A good post, and some other analogies I can think of are/were the concept of specialized "word processor" computers, specialized CAD stations, specialized gaming hardware... Pretty much if there was marketing material with words like "accelerator" "turbo" "extreme" it probably fits right in.
  - mjn 13y ago
    I agree w.r.t. the 1970s, but the Lisp Machines were having cost-competition issues even before the Intel/SPARC machines caught up, due to the advent of lower-cost, smallish minicomputers that could be used as single-user machines if you had the budget. By 1985 you could get a MicroVAX II for ~$20k, plus another ~$8k for a copy of VAX Lisp, and have a quite reasonable Lisp system, with the downside of having to store a reasonably big cabinet (but not full-VAX kind of big).
    - lispm 13y ago
      The basic MicroVAX II was quite slow, with tiny memory, just a text terminal interface, ... To get anything comparable to a Symbolics 3640 one would have to invest quite a bit more money and it would still be slower as an 11/780. The lab at our University was using a lot of Lisp on a DEC 10 and VAX 11/750 and 11/780. Nobody I know was keen to move their Lisp development to a Microvax (though there were some), There were some Symbolics 3640 users. Then later Apollo/SUN/Compaq/Mac II, ...
  - rbanffy 13y ago
    > So Lisp Machines were developed to run a very compact machine code representation of Lisp and with very large main memories (1 Megabyte or more), graphical user interfaces and all that for a SINGLE user - a $100k per machine. > Later in the mid 80s the architectures were brought to microprocessors I wonder when will someone build one onto an FPGA. It's the ultra-übergeek version of the Jeri Ellsworth's C-One.
    - sourceless 13y ago
      raises hand I'm currently reading all the papers/talking to people so I can design one (still torn between doing something historically accurate or modern, new, and potentially useful).

jff 13y ago

It's damn cool in any case, looking forward to future articles!