Testing the waters.

[Chris Bitmead uid(x22068)]

>I think it is not so much "and", but "or".  Either we strive to make
>the POS as transparent as possible, or it is up to the application.
>If there is significant labor on the part of the application, a
>programmer might as well use pathnames and do object archiving by
>hand.
>
>The result of a transparent POS in LispOS should be that programs
>written for LispOS have very minimal responsibilities
>w.r.t. persistence.  

That is correct. That's why POS programs won't work in a conventional
environment. POS programs don't do anything to access the
disk. Conventional programs go through all sorts of contortions.