Tue, 24 Mar 1998 19:24:40 -0600 (CST)
> Well, I think people have gotten carried away with the OS
> part. There's a belief that memory management and scheduler HAVE to be
> written in Lisp for a "LispOS". Sure, given time and EXPERIENCE,
> that'd be nice. But I think a whole lot can be down running on top of
> an existing OS, be it some Unix derivitive or even some version of
> WinDoze. Or all of the above! From the user's environment point of
> view, it should NOT matter what the underlying OS is. Abstract it and
> wrap into oblivion!
While I wholeheartedly agree that implementing a LispOS as a
shell that rides on an existing O/S and gives a Lisp-Centric
view of the computing environment is a good idea, I also think
that eventually writing a kernel from scratch might help performance
a bit if the kernel is made Lisp friendly.
But for a first concrete goal, and something that others can
use, I agree with you.
> Mike McDonald