different alternatives for lispOS

[Kelly Murray]

> Do you mean to be as broad as "a featureful Lisp system with some OOP
> features"?  I tend to agree that smallness should't be an overriding
> priority,

Not a Lisp with "some OO", but a "OO Lisp with persistence".
This is why CLOS is the right starting point, but the new language needs
go beyond CL/CLOS, and be fully OO.  For example, "defstructs" should be killed.
"deftype" might be killed too.
The Dylan folks were in the ballpark, certainly on the stadium grounds,
with their direction.  

> KM> Start with Linux, and run a lisp based web server that has
> KM> persistent objects on top of Linux.  Make everything use
> KM> persistent objects, don't use the file system.  This means even
> KM> source code is not kept in files!

> It sounds to me like what you want pretty much already exists.
> MetaHTML has a variety of database interfaces.  CL-HTTP has the usual
> lisp dumping facilities.

Yes and No.  I gladly will beg/borrow/steal any and all existing
ideas/code from others, but they are problems with what exists today,
primarily the lack of true OO integration.

Does the fact that it looks like what I want already exists
give you confidence that we can achieve my goals?

-Kelly Edward Murray   (speaking for myself)