Re:ChrysaLisp – A 64-bit Lisp OS with GUI
by bitwize on Friday October 13, 2017 @06:58PM
(#15469750)
The reason why Lisp machines failed is because, with compiler and CPU architecture improvements, "C machines" started trouncing Lisp machines in terms of performance, even at running Lisp code. Symbolics's last product was Genera running on a "C machine" architecture. This doesn't obviate your statements about library support, but I don't believe the dream of "Lisp from bare metal on up" is worth abandoning entirely.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
What would be the advantage? Why put in all that work just to reinvent the wheel?
Re:ChrysaLisp – A 64-bit Lisp OS with GUI
by progman on Saturday October 14, 2017 @09:24AM
(#15472055)
I think one big advantage could be seemless integration of all applications. Genera on Lisp Machines [1] and McClim [2] illustrate how it works.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1878220
[2] https://common-lisp.net/project/mcclim/excite.html
In classical OS (Linux, Windows, Mac) the developer is responsible for seemless integration (in KDE or MS Office for instance). It is easy to break design guidelines here which causes ugly interoperation, or even lack of interoperation.