Xref: utzoo comp.arch:10771 comp.lang.misc:3116
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!mcvax!ukc!etive!aiai!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Double Width Integer Multiplication and Division
Message-ID: <607@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 22 Jul 89 16:29:43 GMT
References: <57125@linus.UUCP> <1989Jun24.230056.27774@utzoo.uucp> <13961@haddock.ima.isc.com> <1395@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Reply-To: jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton)
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 20

In article <1395@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>In article <13961@haddock.ima.isc.com>, suitti@haddock.ima.isc.com (Stephen Uitti) writes:
>> LISP does not actually pass whole lists around - it uses pointers
>> and linked lists.
>
>And this is the reason that production programs and library subroutines
>should not be written in Lisp.

Why?  Because Lisp uses pointers?

Some of the things C library procedures do are much worse than that.

 >But it is possible to get much done efficiently.  This should be done
 >by enabling those who can see how to do things to do them and to
 >communicate that to others.  Anything can be done on a universal
 >Turing machine, but I am not willing to wait a month for it to
 >multiply two 10-digit numbers by reducing everything to successor.

I'm not sure if this is still supposed to be about Lisp.
If so, you should note that Lisp has more than one data type.