Re: What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- From: Andrew Reilly <andrew-newspost@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 09:38:50 +1000
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:14:28 -0700, fireblade wrote:
I just finished reading Anti Patterns Refactoring Software
Architectures,and it hint me that i'm regularly singing gospels to
lisp being a universal hummer for every kind of problem. Once in a
while somebody ask's what is lisp bad for? I basically have only two
ideas:
1.Talking with c++ (Possible but not recommended, due to c++
idiosyncrasy )
2. Erlang/Termite like processes (i wonder how many processes could
scieener support?)
What are the other domains where lisp doesn't fit in?
In the hope of being proven wrong, I'd say that if not impossible, it
would be pretty painful for hard realtime control. Anywhere where there
are good reasons for the abstraction of memory that lisp gives you to be a
bad idea. (I have done lots of work where the abstraction of memory that
C gives you is a bad idea, and the only recourse is native assembly
code.) I concede that it is probably possible to write interrupt handlers
in lisp that perform no new memory allocations, but it would probably feel
a lot like writing Fortran, rather than lisp, thus defeating the point...
Cheers,
--
Andrew
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- From: Eirik Mikkelsen
- Re: What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- References:
- What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- From: fireblade
- What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- Prev by Date: Opposite of ~^ FORMAT Directive
- Next by Date: Re: programmatically determine if argument is list compatible to a given lambda list
- Previous by thread: Re: What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- Next by thread: Re: What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
