Re: [Axiom-developer] Boot

[root]

> | lisp is the implementation language of the interpreter and has been
> | since the early 70s timeframe. coding it in lisp is not a departure. 
> 
> But in the light of improvements that happened since then, and
> considering we're now in 2006, it is a backward step, the benefits of
> which I fail to see.

the benefits of which i see quite clearly. what new improvements in
lisp make cleaning up the interpreter code 'a backward step'?
the new ASDF facility will make makefiles into one-liners.
the new UFFI facility will make external functions portable.
the McCLIM facility will make embedded graphics possible and portable.
CLOS will make the interpreter much more general and easier to change.
CLSQL will allow the use of a real database backend.
SLIME will make emacs know all about axiom.

i've hated boot since the first day i saw it.
there is no chance of convincing me to code in boot.
it adds nothing and subtracts A LOT.
you lose the programs <=> data equivalence.
you can't do macros or backquote since boot doesn't do parens.
you can't do CLOS since boot knows nothing about objects.
you can't do CLSQL without changing boot syntax ( [] is CLSQL syntax)
you can't do SLIME without changing it to understand boot.
the lisp top-level doesn't understand boot so you HAVE to know lisp anyway.
and, there are exactly 0 boot programmers left in the world.
there hasn't been new boot code written in years.

i failed to see the benefit of autoconf/automake.
you do. so you're rewriting it. because you're willing to invest
time and effort in writing and fully documenting a new makefile
structure you'll clearly 'win' the makefile 'debate'. i stand to
lose a lot (since i invented and implemented the makefile scheme)
but (provided you document it) i'm willing to follow your lead.

t