Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool2.mu.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!plains!person
From: person@plains.NoDak.edu (Brett G. Person)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Is this the end of the lisp wave?
Message-ID: <7796@plains.NoDak.edu>
Date: 28 Jan 91 02:18:38 GMT
References: <127724@linus.mitre.org>
Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo
Lines: 24

In article <127724@linus.mitre.org> djb@babypuss.mitre.org (David J. Braunegg) writes:
>>Lack of demand due to Common LISP's enormous size, complexity, resource
>>requirements, training, etc.
>>
>>Common LISP effectively died from obesity.
>
This is very right.  How manny different functions do the same thig in 
LISP?  LISP is beginning to look like something written by the government.
Which - I suppose - with the ANSI standards, it is:-)
>
>
>OK.  What are the problems preventing a smaller, more efficient Lisp
>so that we aren't forced to use the almost-a-programming-language C?
>

Simple, get rid of the redundancies, force people to re-write old code with
new styles, make the new lisp powerfull enough - i.e. give me a cheap
compiler that won't bring the machine I'm on to it's knees evertytime I use
it. 

-- 
Brett G. Person
North Dakota State University
uunet!plains!person | person@plains.bitnet | person@plains.nodak.edu