Re: Common Lisp Subset

[Jim Kempf <kempf%hplabsc@hplabs.ARPA>]

>    Today it is hard to get a personal computer with less than 64k of
>memory; ten years ago it was hard to get a personal computer with more
>then 64k.  The question is how long is the performance window of
>subset Common Lisp v.s. full Common Lisp going to be open.  In your

I think there is an additional issue here besides simply reducing
resource requirments, and that is one of language design principles.
Should the language designer provide a rich language with lots of
features (like PL/I and Common Lisp) or rather a minimal set
of orthogonal features which programmers can build upon (like C
and Smalltalk)? An argument for the former is that it allows
programmers to start at a higher level, reducing the need for 
porting lower level packages. An argument for the latter is
conceptual simplicity and enhancement of the programmer's
ability to tune the application to resource requirements
("you only pay for what you use"). 

		Jim Kempf	kempf@hplabs