From: ·····@markwatson.com
Subject: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <8bh1tu$16k$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
I was playing with the standalone application generator in LispWorks
4.1 last night, and I could not help feel sad that we did not have this
type of delivery capability for LISP systems 10 to 15 years ago. If
LISP vendors had solved technology and business model problems of
application delivery a decade ago, perhaps people would be learning
Common LISP in school, rather than Java.
-Mark
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Christopher R. Barry
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <87zorn20mz.fsf@2xtreme.net>
·····@markwatson.com writes:
> I was playing with the standalone application generator in LispWorks
> 4.1 last night, and I could not help feel sad that we did not have this
> type of delivery capability for LISP systems 10 to 15 years ago. If
> LISP vendors had solved technology and business model problems of
> application delivery a decade ago, perhaps people would be learning
> Common LISP in school, rather than Java.
> -Mark
Plenty can and do learn Common Lisp in school, if they go to a real
university with a real CS department and get a real degree. The
existence of many of these courses and the Lisp skill of some of the
professors might not be apparent from looking at the course catalogs
for these schools (Berkeley, MIT, Stanford, etc, etc.) but they are
there.
There really are a lot of brilliant and successful Lisp programmers
out there doing really cool stuff that never give this newsgroup one
iota of their time.
Christopher
From: ·····@markwatson.com
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <8biibr$ihh$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Hello Christopher,
Of course there are a lot of great projects done in LISP. My point was
that the use of LISP would be far more widespread today if 10-15 years
ago we had the type of high quality/low cost LISP delivery systems that
we have today.
re: LISP in school: I am old enough that my undergraduate programming
was done toggling programs in via a front panel (yuck!) (I went to
UCSB, UC Berkeley, and UCSD).
-Mark
In article <··············@2xtreme.net>,
······@2xtreme.net (Christopher R. Barry) wrote:
> ·····@markwatson.com writes:
>
> > I was playing with the standalone application generator in LispWorks
> > 4.1 last night, and I could not help feel sad that we did not have
this
> > type of delivery capability for LISP systems 10 to 15 years ago. If
> > LISP vendors had solved technology and business model problems of
> > application delivery a decade ago, perhaps people would be learning
> > Common LISP in school, rather than Java.
> > -Mark
>
> Plenty can and do learn Common Lisp in school, if they go to a real
> university with a real CS department and get a real degree. The
> existence of many of these courses and the Lisp skill of some of the
> professors might not be apparent from looking at the course catalogs
> for these schools (Berkeley, MIT, Stanford, etc, etc.) but they are
> there.
>
> There really are a lot of brilliant and successful Lisp programmers
> out there doing really cool stuff that never give this newsgroup one
> iota of their time.
>
> Christopher
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Frank A. Adrian
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <ZU7D4.912$Uz3.20411@news.uswest.net>
<·····@markwatson.com> wrote in message ·················@nnrp1.deja.com...
> re: LISP in school: I am old enough that my undergraduate programming
> was done toggling programs in via a front panel (yuck!) (I went to
> UCSB, UC Berkeley, and UCSD).
Switches? You had switches! God, we would have killed for switches! When
I was a kid we had to move piles of dinosaur dung about to do our computing.
And we had to walk to school 12 miles in the snow. And it was uphill both
ways!
faa
From: Andrew Cooke
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <8bkk7t$md6$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Sounds more fun that this silly piece of squared tape. I can only move
left or right in single steps and some silly fool decided on the
convention that only every other spoace would be intermediate storage.
Now where's my eraser gone?
Andrew
[In the middle of reading Hodge's biography...]
In article <···················@news.uswest.net>,
"Frank A. Adrian" <·······@uswest.net> wrote:
> <·····@markwatson.com> wrote in message
·················@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > re: LISP in school: I am old enough that my undergraduate
programming
> > was done toggling programs in via a front panel (yuck!) (I went to
> > UCSB, UC Berkeley, and UCSD).
>
> Switches? You had switches! God, we would have killed for switches!
When
> I was a kid we had to move piles of dinosaur dung about to do our
computing.
> And we had to walk to school 12 miles in the snow. And it was uphill
both
> ways!
>
> faa
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Christopher R. Barry
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <87n1nn0yrr.fsf@2xtreme.net>
·····@markwatson.com writes:
> Of course there are a lot of great projects done in LISP. My point was
> that the use of LISP would be far more widespread today if 10-15 years
> ago we had the type of high quality/low cost LISP delivery systems that
> we have today.
I think this is specious (if even that), but feel free to explicate
and substantiate your claim and expound a good argument for your case.
I think this is a very complicated thing, and a COMPREHENSIVE analysis
and exposition of why Lisp didn't "win big" and Java and C++ made it
is a degree-worthy thesis that would have to address a very broad
range of socioeconomic and technical factors and cofactors.
I also think an analysis and exposition of lesser rigor than this (as
we have seen plenty of in this group over the years) would not be
meritous of any furthur discussion.
Christopher
From: Stig E. Sandø
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <87r9cz5qn2.fsf@palomba.bananos.org>
·····@markwatson.com writes:
> I was playing with the standalone application generator in LispWorks
> 4.1 last night, and I could not help feel sad that we did not have this
> type of delivery capability for LISP systems 10 to 15 years ago. If
> LISP vendors had solved technology and business model problems of
> application delivery a decade ago, perhaps people would be learning
> Common LISP in school, rather than Java.
Umm, maybe I have misunderstood but doesn't usually Java also require
a rather big runtime environment to run, just like Lisp? Maybe the
world will easier accept that need these days though.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Stig Erik Sandoe ····@ii.uib.no http://www.ii.uib.no/~stig/
From: ·····@markwatson.com
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <8biing$iqk$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Hello Stig,
The runtime system for Java is huge, but it is free to end users. My
point was that the cost of delivery (for LISP developers) has come way
down.
On second thought however, for Open Source projects, CLISP, CMU Lisp,
etc. has been available for a long time.
-Mark
In article <··············@palomba.bananos.org>,
····@ii.uib.no (Stig E.=?iso-8859-1?q?_Sand=F8?=) wrote:
> ·····@markwatson.com writes:
>
> > I was playing with the standalone application generator in LispWorks
> > 4.1 last night, and I could not help feel sad that we did not have
this
> > type of delivery capability for LISP systems 10 to 15 years ago. If
> > LISP vendors had solved technology and business model problems of
> > application delivery a decade ago, perhaps people would be learning
> > Common LISP in school, rather than Java.
>
> Umm, maybe I have misunderstood but doesn't usually Java also require
> a rather big runtime environment to run, just like Lisp? Maybe the
> world will easier accept that need these days though.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stig Erik Sandoe ····@ii.uib.no http://www.ii.uib.no/~stig/
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Charles Hixson
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <38DD2E28.7D97975D@earthlink.net>
·····@markwatson.com wrote:
> Hello Stig,
>
> The runtime system for Java is huge, but it is free to end users. My
> point was that the cost of delivery (for LISP developers) has come way
> down.
> On second thought however, for Open Source projects, CLISP, CMU Lisp,
> etc. has been available for a long time.
> -Mark
>
> -- snip
One of the BIG advantages of Java is that it's easy to write portable
dialogs. The claim is made "write once, run anywhere". That's an
exaggeration, but it's true enough to give Java a big boost. But just TRY
to do that in any other language. HTML can do it, but that's hardly a
complete language. (Of course, a part of the reason that this is possible
is that the basic Java system is free, but it's also supported [nearly]
identically on all [well, most] platforms. Including the graphics
interface!)
-- Charles Hixson
-- ·············@earthling.net
From: David Hanley
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <38E12742.1D59E2FC@ncgr.org>
Charles Hixson wrote:
>
> One of the BIG advantages of Java is that it's easy to write portable
> dialogs. The claim is made "write once, run anywhere". That's an
> exaggeration, but it's true enough to give Java a big boost. But just TRY
> to do that in any other language. HTML can do it, but that's hardly a
> complete language. (Of course, a part of the reason that this is possible
> is that the basic Java system is free, but it's also supported [nearly]
> identically on all [well, most] platforms. Including the graphics
> interface!)
Doesn't CLIM give you most of this? It's available on many systems now.
The huge API of java is it's killer feature, in general. Sockets, threads
multimedia, etc, all there.
dave
From: Rahul Jain
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <8bsipi$ns5$1@joe.rice.edu>
In article <·················@ncgr.org> posted on Tuesday, March 28,
2000 3:42 PM, David Hanley <···@ncgr.org> wrote:
>
>
> Charles Hixson wrote:
>
> Doesn't CLIM give you most of this? It's available on many systems now.
> The huge API of java is it's killer feature, in general. Sockets, threads
> multimedia, etc, all there.
>
> dave
>
Widget sets that are buggy and have millions of undocumented/incorrectly
documented features/bugs.... try manipulating styled text... it's a nightmare
with random ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsExeptions when rendering... Yeah, it
would be nice if it worked... IF only... Oh and HOW do you use the Link Style
so that it actually DOES something when clicking on the text?
This was on the Solaris 1.2.x JDK, btw
--
-> -\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/^\-=-=-=<*><*>=-=-=-/^\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/- <-
-> -/-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/ { Rahul -<>- Jain } \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\- <-
-> -\- "I never could get the hang of Thursdays." - HHGTTG by DNA -/- <-
-> -/- http://photino.sid.rice.edu/ -=- ·················@usa.net -\- <-
|--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
Version 11.423.999.210020101.23.50110101.042
(c)1996-2000, All rights reserved. Disclaimer available upon request.
From: David Hanley
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <38E2684C.E9C57F67@ncgr.org>
Rahul Jain wrote:
> In article <·················@ncgr.org> posted on Tuesday, March 28,
> 2000 3:42 PM, David Hanley <···@ncgr.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Charles Hixson wrote:
> >
> > Doesn't CLIM give you most of this? It's available on many systems now.
> > The huge API of java is it's killer feature, in general. Sockets, threads
> > multimedia, etc, all there.
> >
> > dave
> >
>
> Widget sets that are buggy and have millions of undocumented/incorrectly
> documented features/bugs.... try manipulating styled text... it's a nightmare
> with random ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsExeptions when rendering... Yeah, it
> would be nice if it worked... IF only... Oh and HOW do you use the Link Style
> so that it actually DOES something when clicking on the text?
I didn't say it's huge WORKING api was it's killer feature. :)
Unfortunately, programmers in general seem to be drawn to the potential
for goodness, rather than it's realization. Or maybe this is managers? For
example, managers want to use C because "it's fast." Yes, potentially, assuming
you don't have memory management problems, have to recreate lisp functionality,
etc.
Same with java--programmers/managers see the *potential* for portability,
speed, neat featues, etc, and rush to it before it's there. In a way, I can't
blame SUN for this. Microsoft made a living off of showing promising
api's and vaporware, and was killing sun. In reality, the blame rests
on the developers who have accepted and implicitly encouraged this.
dave
From: Tim Bradshaw
Subject: Re: Stand alone application generators: I wish I had this 15 years ago
Date:
Message-ID: <ey3bt3x68xg.fsf@cley.com>
* David Hanley wrote:
> Charles Hixson wrote:
>>
>> One of the BIG advantages of Java is that it's easy to write portable
>> dialogs. The claim is made "write once, run anywhere". That's an
>> exaggeration, but it's true enough to give Java a big boost. But just TRY
>> to do that in any other language. HTML can do it, but that's hardly a
>> complete language. (Of course, a part of the reason that this is possible
>> is that the basic Java system is free, but it's also supported [nearly]
>> identically on all [well, most] platforms. Including the graphics
>> interface!)
> Doesn't CLIM give you most of this? It's available on many systems
> now.
I think so, except CLIM tends to be not that pretty compared with
purely native applications. On the other hand it is very fast to
write things with CLIM, and if you want something that works without
spending a million years tweaking, it's a win.
It runs on everything you'd want, too -- Unix, Windows, Mac.
--tim
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:40:32 GMT, ·····@markwatson.com wrote:
>I was playing with the standalone application generator in LispWorks
>4.1 last night, and I could not help feel sad that we did not have this
>type of delivery capability for LISP systems 10 to 15 years ago.
A runtime generator for Procyon Common Lisp (Mac) was available in 1989
and a runtime generator for Golden Common Lisp (PC) was available in 1990.
These allowed us to deliver our Lisp applications on a Mac Classic (anyone
remember those ?) in 4MB and a PC (8MB) running Windows 2.
Mark
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Dalgarno
R & D Manager
Scientia
http://www.scientia.com