On Tuesday, 16 October 2012 at 02:45:42 UTC, so wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2012 at 20:41:55 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Now imagine those that have experimented how powerful Lisp and
Smalltalk based OS were.
It is so sad to see IDE makers still trying to replicate the
experience from those environments.
--
Paulo
Thanks for mentioning that, checked "lisp os" and next thing
was "www.loper-os.org/?p=69". It might be offensive to some
people but reading his posts/rants now, i kind of like what he
says. This is what i was talking about when i say that i feel
lucky because Lisp was not my first language. Looks like he
experienced the language devolutions and very (rightly so)
frustrated.
An example:
"You will not find a “Thumbs Down for Python” essay in this
blog, because Python users make no attempt to peddle their
crock of shit as “the future of Lisp.” I have no quarrel
with users of Python, Ruby, Dylan, and other shoddy “infix
Lisps.” Because they are honest.
It is the lying of Clojure users which upsets me, and their
deliberate attempts to rewrite history, to make people forget
that truly-interactive, advanced Lisp systems once existed"
I know that site, you should have a look at
http://www.loper-os.org/?p=932 presentation.
Now imagine that computer system was developed in the late 70's
and how things would look like today if it wasn't for the AI
Winter.
Same thing with Smalltalk environments, which are the only ones I
know with the same capabilities.
Everything that is trendy nowadays, unit testing, code
refactoring, live editing, JIT and AOT compilation, full GC based
environments, was already available in Lisp and Smalltalk
machines.
Or for that matter look at Native Oberon, a fully working desktop
operating system implemented in a GC enabled systems programming
language.
Sad that mainstream always takes generations to accept something.
--
Paulo
