From: Richard Pitre
Subject: Re: efficiency of Lisp compared to other progr. lang.?
Date:
Message-ID: <4hpncg$t9d@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
In article <·····················@expernet26.expernet.com>
········@expernet26.expernet.com (Peter Ludemann) writes:
> In article <··········@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> ··@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU
(Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
>
> There _is_ a "language independent procedure call" standard in progress.
> There was a paper about it in Sigplan notices last year.
>
> [snip]
>
> IBM has had an inter-language standard for a number of years, at least
> on the 370/390 mainframes and AS/400. You can do calls between C,
> PL/I, Fortran and COBOL (on AS/400, RPG and (I think) Pascal get added
> to this). The standard also covers exception handling, which is much
> trickier than parameter passing. It's all packaged up in something
> called "Common Execution Environment" or "Integrated Languages
> Environment". It adds some overhead, so you can turn it on and off by
> pragmas. [I know about this because I was involved in designing an
> early version; the internal politics were much more of a problem than
> determining the technical details.]
> --
> Peter Ludemann ········@expernet.com,
When you mix politics with information technology you get material for a book
like the Hichhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Of course, you have to remove most of
the brutal realities so that it reads like the comedy it is.