The funny thing is, as Dave Barry once remarked, is that they already have an in-house solution for this. When the bill comes in different from the original quote, don't pay them. I mean, they have tanks, right?
Advertisements are also pitched to convince your customers that they made the right choice. M$ has to spend the money to keep their users under the influence of their orbital mind-control lasers.
Multitasking: Invented by amiga I thought Unix had been doing that for decades before teh Amiga showed up.
Actually other OSs had been doing it before Unix, e.g., Multics (smaller and faster than modern Unixen;-), ITS, even older IBM OSs.
The first Multitasking OS for PCs, AFAIK, was MP/M by Digital Research, which came out concurrently with CP/M 2.0 as I recall. Around 1979 or 1980, anyway. I even bought a copy! Debugging my floppy disk controller to deal with memory banking issues was no picnic;-). Vendor support in those days was "hey, you've got the source code, right?" Now, I just wish I did have the source code most of the time...:-)
How flumescent of you to have noticed the acrocity of how names are chosen. It is a sweebblesmort and dynamiderous business to select names in a turbumley fashion. Nasdaqerly, it is not a cartomotic for all.
Also note that MCL already supports "infinite precision" arithmetic with rational numbers as ratios of integers (each of whose size is limited not by the register size, but by the amount of memory in the machine).
However, Dylan's infix syntax (highly readable is a matter of opinion) tosses out the ability to write macros the way one can in Lisp, and thus, the essential reason Lisp was found valuable in this application.
Lisp is its own meta-language. That's the basis of much of its power.
Also while Dylan can be more efficient than Common Lisp in terms of the object subsystem, I believe CLOS with the Metaobject protocol fully implemented is more powerful.
Last, the condition system in ANSI Common Lisp is at least as sophisticated as Dylan's as far as I can tell. Do you have some particular feature in mind?
Hacking Lisp professionally since 1985... and still doing so.
Slashdot Mirror
The funny thing is, as Dave Barry once remarked, is that they already have an in-house solution for this. When the bill comes in different from the original quote, don't pay them. I mean, they have tanks, right?
Advertisements are also pitched to convince your customers that they made the right choice. M$ has to spend the money to keep their users under the influence of their orbital mind-control lasers.
Actually other OSs had been doing it before Unix, e.g., Multics (smaller and faster than modern Unixen
The first Multitasking OS for PCs, AFAIK, was MP/M by Digital Research, which came out concurrently with CP/M 2.0 as I recall. Around 1979 or 1980, anyway. I even bought a copy! Debugging my floppy disk controller to deal with memory banking issues was no picnic
How flumescent of you to have noticed the acrocity of how names are chosen. It is a sweebblesmort and dynamiderous business to select names in a turbumley fashion. Nasdaqerly, it is not a cartomotic for all.
Also note that MCL already supports "infinite precision" arithmetic with rational numbers as ratios of integers (each of whose size is limited not by the register size, but by the amount of memory in the machine).
Gee, and I thought children could see BETTER than us old farts. ;-)
Lisp is its own meta-language. That's the basis of much of its power.
Also while Dylan can be more efficient than Common Lisp in terms of the object subsystem, I believe CLOS with the Metaobject protocol fully implemented is more powerful.
Last, the condition system in ANSI Common Lisp is at least as sophisticated as Dylan's as far as I can tell. Do you have some particular feature in mind?
Hacking Lisp professionally since 1985... and still doing so.