On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Jeff Read wrote:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Abdulaziz Ghuloum <[email protected]> wrote:
Since the time R6RS was being discussed, available memory
has more than doubled. By the time R7RS is finalized (if
ever), memory would at least quadruple again. This is
why I asked John about how many years he's been using the
"space efficiency" argument; to me, that argument has been
obsolete about 2 years after I've first heard it.
I'm sure there are those who will want to see R7RS on their PDP-10 or
Amiga 2000. :)
Seriously, though, assuming that the primary use case for your
language will be desktop or server PC's is folly. As others have
pointed out, there are still plenty of places where every byte counts.
Cout me in. My computer is nine years old. It runs perfectly
fine and I am very happy with it. I would like applications to remain
space efficient so that I don't have to replace it unnecessarily.
To give just one example, Windows Vista has been unpopular for
very good reason. Having to upgrade one's hardware to be able
to run new software must be good for someone's pockets, but certainly
not mine or any other user.
Andre
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
