Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-29 Thread Sean Conner
It was thus said that the Great Swift Griggs once stated: > > I don't want to bolt > on anything else, just let me define the same function twice with two > different parameter lists and I'll be one happy dude. The problem with that is the function name mangling (in object files) needs to be

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-29 Thread Swift Griggs
On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Paul Koning wrote: > > What have they added? I recall hearing of someone doing some language > > that requires a runtime with garbage collection and trying to call it > > C, which to my mind would be a huge mistake - is that C11? > That might have been D, which seems

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-29 Thread Paul Koning
> On Apr 29, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Mouse wrote: > >>> I [...] have found C++11 added some nice things. >> Both C++11 and C11 really have me excited. It's a kick in the butt >> to the compiler makers. > > What have they added? I recall hearing of someone doing some

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-29 Thread Mouse
>> I [...] have found C++11 added some nice things. > Both C++11 and C11 really have me excited. It's a kick in the butt > to the compiler makers. What have they added? I recall hearing of someone doing some language that requires a runtime with garbage collection and trying to call it C, which

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-28 Thread Swift Griggs
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Ben Sinclair wrote: > it and Apple's SDKs felt, but appreciate a lot of that now. I've heard they have a lot of boilerplate code, but it sounds like there is some reason to it, if you got cozy with it. > I'm doing some embedded C++ work right now too, and often wish I could

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-28 Thread Ben Sinclair
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Swift Griggs wrote: > > It's had at least a mediocre run. I mean, they used it for NeXTStep apps > too. It's been around for quite a while with a pretty solid core of > adherents. A C++ god that I used to work with called it "C++ without

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-28 Thread Swift Griggs
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Paul Koning wrote: > Did it really? It is used in the Mac, much as Bliss was in VMS, but > apart from that, would anyone use it? It's had at least a mediocre run. I mean, they used it for NeXTStep apps too. It's been around for quite a while with a pretty solid core of

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-28 Thread Norman Jaffe
c and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 7:58:43 AM Subject: Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from) > On Apr 27, 2016, at 11:28 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. <je...@merlintec.com> > wrote: > ... > O

Re: smalltalk and lisp (was: strangest systems I've sent email from)

2016-04-28 Thread Paul Koning
> On Apr 27, 2016, at 11:28 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote: > ... > Objective-C was the only other C derivative to have a significant > impact. Did it really? It is used in the Mac, much as Bliss was in VMS, but apart from that, would anyone use it? paul