threads
Bijan Parsia
bparsia at email.unc.edu
Mon Feb 18 17:24:37 UTC 2002
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Ralph Johnson wrote:
> On 2/17/02 9:26 PM, "Scott A Crosby" <crosby at qwes.math.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> > Yep.. Most of this isn't more than an implementation problem.. Why were
> > there no really good and fast LISP (~comparable to C) compilers for
> > numerics and bit/byte manipulations before CMUCL? Because nobody had
> > thought to write one. :)
(It's not just "thought to", but "figured out how to" :))
> I recall that MacLisp on the PDP10 was faster at numeric computing than
> FORTRAN back in the early 70s. They took it as a challenge and kept working
> on their compiler until they beat FORTRAN.
One pointer on Common Lisp and fast numerics:
http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/1044/http:zSzzSzhttp.cs.berkeley.eduzSz~fatemanzSzpaperszSzlispfloat.pdf/fateman95fast.pdf
I seem to recall stuff on using Lisp for celstial mechanics? that beat out
Fortran...but I can't find a link.
Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|