The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Carl Shapiro <cshapiro+s...@panix.com>
Date: 24 Jun 2005 23:16:05 -0400
Local: Fri, Jun 24 2005 11:16 pm
Subject: Re: ILC 2005: Microsoft Demands Surrender, CL Says It Has Not Yet Begun to Fight
Kenny Tilton <ktil...@nyc.rr.com> writes: FYI, this information has been posted on the conference website for > This correspondent's chin hit the floor when he realized this speaker > was from Microsoft: > http://pdcbloggers.net/Question_and_Answer/PNL02/Patrick_Dussud.category quite some time. http://international-lisp-conference.org/speakers.html#patrick_dussud > Mr. Dussud was favored with one of the closing plenary sessions of the I think you are missing the point. It is difficult to integrate Lisp > conference, and used it to suggest Common Lisp cripple itself in > various ways (help me, someone: static typing is all I remember) so it > could have the honor of running on Microsoft's CLR. Well, OK, the > motivation would be in the title of the paper "Re-inventing Lisp for > Ubiquity". into an engineering environment where programmers are writing or integrating software written in many different languages. The suggested changes would make Lisp more easily hosted on top of a contemporary runtime like the JVM or the CLR, in turn making it easier to deliver the object code of applications written in Lisp. If you do not think Lisp has a problem delivering applications, ask yourself why Lisp completely missed the boat on component software. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||