Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- From: joswig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 29 Jan 2006 14:25:00 -0800
Tin Gherdanarra schrieb:
> I'm not sure if there isn't more to this. For one, there are all sorts
> of research projects that use specialized Schemes as implementation
> language because it is so easy to implement domain-specific langauges
> (concurrent, linear, for various vms, etc.) In a way this IS "tweaking
> the language". Then there are several
> CL implementation with different focus -- these implementations all
> adhere to the standard, but this external, independent standard
> is exactly the problem because it gets in the way of blessing any
> community-based module (like TCP/IP sockets and threads) as "the"
> implementation and including it in the standard distribution. In
> other words, Lisp lacks a benevolent dictator, and this is bad for
> standardizing wheels in a pragmatic way.
Lisp does not need a 'benevolent dictator'. You may need one.
But then you can always join the Python community.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- From: Tin Gherdanarra
- Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- References:
- Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- From: Tin Gherdanarra
- Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- From: Cameron MacKinnon
- Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- From: Tin Gherdanarra
- Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- Prev by Date: Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- Next by Date: Re: Any leak in my first macro? :)
- Previous by thread: Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- Next by thread: Re: Interesting developments since "Beating the averages"?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|