freenode/lisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
21:20:02
zhlyg
housel: yes of-course, the symbols value vs its reachability/existence. Anyhow, thanks for the link. Those pre-CL lisps really seems to be the origin of the obarray concept.
21:22:32
zhlyg
Interesting style, is it to get temporary reachability of the special symbol X? (LET ((X ...)) ... (MAKUNBOUND 'X) ...) ;bad style
21:23:25
housel
https://www.dreamsongs.com/Files/HOPL2-Uncut.pdf page 12 says that before 1971 it was a list (and thus OBLIST)
21:28:37
zhlyg
housel: wow! thanks for digging that up! So the name is most probably a short for object-array.
5:22:15
ck_
in your essay on perfection vs. performance orientations, you say "I myself recently discovered a marvellous feature in a programming language that I had purposely avoided for the past 10 years"
5:33:35
beach
Interesting. If I type (to Google) the name of the Scheme object system that was worked on by my colleague at the time and that made me not look at CLOS, there are no answers. But if I type my own name, there are pages and pages of results. :)
5:34:48
ck_
ooh. So it wasn't just that "object systems are bad" it was that /their/ object system is bad
5:37:01
beach
It is turned out to be true, there was a lot of stuff that I could ignore, and save a lot of work.
9:10:05
no-defun-allowed
I want to do an experiment to see how often "duplicate" objects appear in (a reasonable fraction of) my Lisp image (with varying definitions of "duplicate"), so I wrote a short program to traverse objects and count the times they are referenced: https://pastebin.com/Dv0tGv8D
9:11:11
no-defun-allowed
Someone suggested it wasn't correct, then backed out, but I wonder if there's something wrong with my method or if EQUAL objects do appear in my image about 5.4 times.