Re: Another algorithmic complexity question
From: Christophe Rhodes (csr21_at_cam.ac.uk)
Date: 11/26/03
- Next message: Kenny Tilton: "Re: CLOS and C++"
- Previous message: Christophe Rhodes: "Re: More static type fun."
- In reply to: David Steuber: "Re: Another algorithmic complexity question"
- Next in thread: Kent M Pitman: "Re: Another algorithmic complexity question"
- Reply: Kent M Pitman: "Re: Another algorithmic complexity question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 21:13:37 +0000
David Steuber <david.steuber@verizon.net> writes:
> Paul Dietz <paul.f.dietz@motorola.com> writes:
>
>> I believe he means no fully ANSI compliant implementation of Lisp has
>> ever been built (individually or collectively). Some come close, but
>> perfection is elusive.
>
> For some reason I find that rather disturbing. Is it really that
> complex? Or are there other reasons?
It seems to be quite tricky. I don't think it's for want of trying
(though it may be for want of market pressure).
As we say these days, "patches welcome" :-)
Christophe
-- http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/ +44 1223 510 299/+44 7729 383 757 (set-pprint-dispatch 'number (lambda (s o) (declare (special b)) (format s b))) (defvar b "~&Just another Lisp hacker~%") (pprint #36rJesusCollegeCambridge)
- Next message: Kenny Tilton: "Re: CLOS and C++"
- Previous message: Christophe Rhodes: "Re: More static type fun."
- In reply to: David Steuber: "Re: Another algorithmic complexity question"
- Next in thread: Kent M Pitman: "Re: Another algorithmic complexity question"
- Reply: Kent M Pitman: "Re: Another algorithmic complexity question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|