ralph@lasso.UUCP (Ralph P. Sobek) (09/25/86)
I enjoyed all the discussion on the pluses and minuses of these and other lisp machines. I, myself, am an Interlisp user. Those who know a particular system well will prefer it over another. All these lisp systems are quite complex and require a long time, a year or so, before one achieves proficiency. And as any language, human or otherwise, one's perception of one's environment depends upon the tools/semantics that the language provides. I have always found Interlisp much more homogeneous than Zetalisp. The packages are structured so as to interface easily. I find the written documentation also much more structured, and smaller, than the number of volumes that come with a Symbolics. Maybe, Symbolics users only use the online documentation and thus avoid the pain of trying to find something in the written documentation. The last time I tried to find something in the Symbolics manuals -- I gave up, frustrated! :-) Interesting will be the future generation of lisp machines, after Common Lisp. Ralph P. Sobek UUCP: mcvax!inria!lasso!ralph@SEISMO.CSS.GOV ARPA: sobek@ucbernie.Berkeley.EDU (automatic forwarding) BITNET: SOBEK@FRMOP11