Mon, 28 Apr 1997 00:07:17 +0200 (MET DST)
[was: Re: thinking about virtual machines]
>>: Christopher J. Vogt
>: Paul Prescod
>> If I understand you, your question is "Why use Lisp instead of some other
> No, my question is why call the thing "LispOS" and optimize for Lisp
> intead of "DynamicOS" optimized for dynamic languages of all sorts.
If it were only me, I'd call it TUNES,
and it'd be a syntax-independent reflective architecture ;-)
Now, your question is important, and joins the essential questions that
some of us have posed earlier, which can be sumed up as the following query:
What are the goals of the lispOS project?
* How is lispOS different from just current mainstream Lisp? How is it an OS?
* What is an OS, after all?
[I have hints in <http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/rideau/Tunes/WhyNewOS/>]
* What makes it better?
How are these better features affected by the need
of heavily communicating with mainstream OSes?
* What kind of OS interface will lispOS provide?
what abstractions do we found the OS upon?
what kind of interaction do we have with mainstream OS abstractions?
* would bindings to other languages be possible? If yes, how, if not, why?
* what semantics do we want? What if it is too low-level or too high-level
to some purpose?
== Fare' -- email@example.com -- Franc,ois-Rene' Rideau -- DDa(.ng-Vu~ Ba^n ==
Join the TUNES project for a computing system based on computing freedom !
TUNES is a Useful, Not Expedient System