why is there not a lisp pc?
in [Lisp]
|
From: Espen Vestre on 29 Dec 2009 05:58 Victor <bobbie(a)ua.fm> writes: > Modern personal computers are able to run Lisp code, but PCs > are not truly "Lisp Machines" as far as I see. Modern mobile phones aren't phones either, the "Phone" in the iPhone is just another unix process... -- (espen)
From: Captain Obvious on 29 Dec 2009 06:26 ??>> Modern personal computers are able to run Lisp code, but PCs ??>> are not truly "Lisp Machines" as far as I see. EV> Modern mobile phones aren't phones either, the "Phone" in the iPhone is EV> just another unix process... As far as I know, smartphones do not work that way -- there is a dedicated processor which handles telephony, and main processor handles only applications. Of course there is some form of communication between these processors, but as telephony is essentially a real time stuff, it is not a good idea for it to depend on application processor.
From: Captain Obvious on 29 Dec 2009 06:30 ??>> Modern personal computers are able to run Lisp code, but PCs ??>> are not truly "Lisp Machines" as far as I see. EV> Modern mobile phones aren't phones either, the "Phone" in the iPhone is EV> just another unix process... Particularly for iPhone you can see components here: http://www.isuppli.com/News/Pages/iPhone-3G-S-Carries-178-96-BOM-and-Manufacturing-Cost-iSuppli-Teardown-Reveals.aspx There is "Application processor" ARM core from Samsung, and "Baseband" -- Dual ARM826 and ARM7Core.
From: Espen Vestre on 29 Dec 2009 06:57 "Captain Obvious" <udodenko(a)users.sourceforge.net> writes: > EV> Modern mobile phones aren't phones either, the "Phone" in the iPhone is > EV> just another unix process... > > As far as I know, smartphones do not work that way -- there is a dedicated > processor which handles telephony, and main processor handles only > applications. Sure, but you can't make a telephone call without that unix process, since it handles the interface to the mobile phone hardware. -- (espen)
From: Tamas K Papp on 29 Dec 2009 07:41
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 12:48:22 +0200, Victor wrote: > On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 12:31:14 +0200, Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:03:00 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> >>> gavino <gavcomedy(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> why is there not a lisp pc for under $300? >>> >>> There once were lisp machines, in the 1980s. Look up "lisp machine" >>> in wikipedia for some interesting history. >> >> I have a Dell laptop. It runs Lisp. That makes it a Lisp PC. > > Tamas, AFAIU Lisp Machines were not only merely able to run Lisp > compiler/interpreter but substantial parts of the operating system and > related system software was written in Lisp, creating an environment for > convenient development in Lisp. Yes, I know what LM were. But I fail to see the big benefit. Of course it is "nice" if the OS is written in the same language as an application, but as long as they can communicate, it does not matter much. Convenience surely does not depend on that. Would my SBCL+SLIME+Emacs environment be "more convenient" if it was ticking on top of a LM? Why would I care? > And that's if we put specific details in their hardware design to > improve Lisp interpreter performance. Or---and I know that this sounds crazy---you can just take advantage of off-the-shelf hardware, especially the low price and ever improving performance, and maybe compile (maybe JIT) your code, so that you don't need a hardware interpreter. Just a wild idea. > Modern personal computers are able to run Lisp code, but PCs are not > truly "Lisp Machines" as far as I see. I think that the distinction is academic. Modern CPUs have so many layers anyway that I don't really care if the topmost layer exposed to the software is some variant of Lisp or not. If we had a "Lisp machine" today, it would most likely be a "microcode machine" that implements some Lisp. And then we would have gavino trolling about how it is not a LM. I have noticed that some people are nostalgic about Lisp Machines, and I appreciate the sentiment, but to me they look like nothing but a glorious dead end. And incidentally, the failure of the Lisp Machine market provided another opportunity for people to write Lisp off. Cheers, Tamas |