A final, short gentle comment..

Francois-Rene Rideau rideau@clipper.ens.fr
Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:06:14 +0200 (MET DST)

> Fare>> If you despise technology, I invite you to live naked
> [rest of diatribe deleted] <<
> I *love* technology. I *hate* seeing it misapplied. (Pout).
We may have different ideas about how to apply it or not.

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Me>> then you presumably have to
>  create a virtual machine on EACH system that
>  (a) uses Scheme as its "native" language;
>  (b) can perform ANY & EVERY O/S task in the context of (a);
> Fare>>  Of course I'll have to (even if it's not Scheme) anyway.
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> So this is your common level! Please note that there is then
> no "LLL" subproject. There are a zillion. I hope you can
> find a zillion "LLL" programmers to write them (and revise them
> IN CONCERT according to your ever-changing specifications)!
> I will watch with interest.
1) There is not a ONE common level.
The more people have in common, the more they'll share.
You just can't ask an Alpha version and a MuP21 version
to share the same LLL, because they are too different architecture.
3-regs RISC cpu implementations will share more together than
just what they will share with every implementation.
Perhaps it's hard for you to accept,
but a heterogeneous world requires heterogeneous solutions.
2) Yes, of course, the more platforms you'll support,
the more LLL programmers you'll have to find to support them.
3) LLL code *required* for the system to run is meant to be as small
as possible, most being done in portable HLL.
4) LLL code *useful* for an efficient implementation sure is
quite more than that *required* for the system to run,
so that even when the system is technically ported to a platform,
there will be a lot of work to LLL programmers to make it an
*efficient* port.
5) The HLL specifications are not meant to change.
The LLL implementors are those free to implement them,
not the HLL free to arbitrarily specify low-level things.
Nothing prevents them from sharing code with LLL implementors from
other platform, while wisdom tells them not to try to have the very
same hack work on completely different architectures.
6) Thanks for your interest.

> PS. This uncured goatskin is beginning to itch. You can have
> it back!
Thanks ! I'll take care of it.

--    ,                                         ,           _ v    ~  ^  --
-- Fare -- rideau@clipper.ens.fr -- Francois-Rene Rideau -- +)ang-Vu Ban --
--                                      '                   / .          --
Join the TUNES project for a computing system based on computing freedom !
		   TUNES is a Useful, Not Expedient System
WWW page at URL: "http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/rideau/Tunes/"