On Tue, 22 May 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Using Boot means that we lose the macro capability of lisp,
No, you don't. You can define macros at Boot level. They get translated as macros at Lisp level. It looks to me that most of your objections stem from insufficient familairity with Boot than informed assessment. | a facility | I use heavily and refuse to give up. If you don't understand the full | power of lisp macros you can't understand the implications of that loss. It looks to me that you don't understand the full power of Boot. | And then there is the efficiency issue. Have you looked at the "lisp | machine language" code generated by boot? I'm amazed you have to ask, but since you asked, yes. I've looked at it. [...] | When you look into how the algebra actually works you'll find that it | depends intimately on lisp features like property lists, cons-cell | modification, etc. But it does NOT NEED to. What you believe to be intimate dependency is just implementation details you've focused on too much to the point of losing sight of thr forest. | Good luck on defining a virtual machine that isn't | the full lisp specification. Lisp already is a virtual machine. yes, but the Axiom run time system does not need full Lisp. In fact, the algebra can be compiled to something more efficient that the use of Lisp as done. -- Gaby _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
