freenode/#clim - IRC Chatlog
Search
3:29:01
nyef
Theory: Common Lisp and CLIM are mid-to-late-1990s era "export versions" of artifacts from a software design philosophy that dates back to the 1960s... But that philosophy may have been killed off in the late 1990s.
3:35:19
beach
The answer to my question might determine whether it is worth our while to revive that philosophy, or drop it for some philosophy that killed it off.
3:36:14
nyef
That's an interesting implicit dichotomy, and it ignores the possibility of synthesizing a new philosophy that partakes of both the old and the new.
3:37:37
beach
True. But, given our available manpower, often the best we can hope for is to copy the best existing designs we can get our hands on.
3:38:43
beach
I do try to come up with better things, but it is hard work, and there is no guarantee that it will actually BE better.
3:38:50
nyef
But at the same time, a philosophy shows *which* designs to steal, and which attempt to improve upon.
3:40:19
nyef
I believe that we have some fundamental difference in underlying philosophy, somewhere, but that the artifacts that we produce may tend to be compatible in practice.
3:43:31
nyef
Neither have I, really. The only way in which I see them as showstoppers is that I don't expect that our *overall systems* to be considered usable by the other.
3:43:38
beach
But I can't do research by accepting that what we have is already the best. I have to explore extreme alternatives. That's what research is about.
3:44:28
beach
Luckily, there are many philosophy-independent byproducts that can be independently useful.
3:46:47
nyef
I sortof came to the conclusion this evening that if I were to sink about three months of full-time work into producing a LispOS, I'd end up with a very good start.
3:47:38
nyef
At the same time, I don't think that it'd be something that I'd want to use on a day-to-day basis.
3:48:08
beach
I totally agree about the three months. You are very knowledgeable, and it is not as hard as some people might think.
3:48:36
beach
And, I don't know for sure that it would be something I myself would want to use. But I don't know that yet.
3:50:58
beach
Anyway, people tend to be awed by "bare metal" Common Lisp implementations, but, seriously, that aspect is neither very hard nor very important.
3:51:27
nyef
Mmm. We have at least two existence-proofs of x86oid "bare metal" CL implementations now.
3:52:10
nyef
The philosophy that I see behind Common Lisp and CLIM is not yet well-defined as far as I'm concerned, but includes some aspect of trust in the user-as-programmer, or possibly programmer-as-user.
3:54:00
beach
However, these days, there is not only the user/programmer, but an OS has to have some protection against malware.
3:55:37
beach
That's a different aspect, yes. I am trying to push shared-memory, multi-core as much as possible, because then I can keep the Lisp philosophy without going into a territory that I have no idea how to work with.
3:56:41
nyef
Yeah, that's the thing. I don't believe in shared-memory multi-core. It *breaks* once you get past a certain point, and that point isn't very far off single-core.
3:57:19
nyef
The further you can push it, the better, absolutely. But hitting double digits is *hard*.