Re: Ada vs. LISP (Response to Robert Eachus's second posting)

[eachus@mbunix.mitre.org (Robert Eachus)]

In article <8903152108.AA06589@zooks.ads.com> rar@ZOOKS.ADS.COM (Bob Riemenschneider) writes:

>Thanks for posting the examples.  While they may not "satisfy the skeptics",
>they make the details of your claims for AdaLISP considerably clearer.  It
>now seems to me that most of the "extreme" reaction was due to a 
>misinterpretation of your original claim.

     Glad to be back in a rational discussion.

>There are exceptions, however.  Based on your latest posting, I take it
>you believe "(apply (read) (read))" to be a specially concocted example...
(lots deleted).

     No, I believe it is an example of a problem that requires an
interpreter.  If you use a compiler for such an application, you (as
you noted) end up writing your own interpreter.  This issue is
different from choice of language, although they are interdependant.
I have BASIC(ugh!, but a nice graphics interface), Scheme and APL
interpreters on my Amiga for that sort of stuff, and I am planning to
get Maple for more sophisticated math munging.  If the result is
something I need to encapsulate for others to use and (horrors)
maintain, I use a compiler, and usually a different language.  The
language switch is usually a non-issue, because a total rewrite is
required anyway.  If it isn't, it means that the requirements haven't
changed drastically and I can stay with an interpreted version.

					Robert I. Eachus

with STANDARD_DISCLAIMER;
use  STANDARD_DISCLAIMER;
function MESSAGE (TEXT: in CLEVER_IDEAS) return BETTER_IDEAS is...