Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.lang.tcl,comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!news.duke.edu!convex!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sytex!smcl
From: smcl@sytex.com (Scott McLoughlin)
Subject: Re: Why you should not use Tcl
Message-ID: <XBLeTc1w165w@sytex.com>
Sender: bbs@sytex.com
Organization: Sytex Access Ltd.
References: <CwvIpI.B3J@apollo.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 07:29:32 GMT
Lines: 30
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu gnu.misc.discuss:18534 comp.lang.tcl:19612 comp.lang.scheme:10101

sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com (Bill Sommerfeld) writes:

> delay slots.  Also, all the test cases (the biggest one was a 10000
> element list) would have fit into the 64k data cache on the PA machine
> he was using...
> 
> I don't think it changes the conclusion ("it just doesn't matter very
> much whether you use reverse! or set-cdr!, so write whatever's easiest
> for you to get right."), but it did bug me somewhat..
> 
> 
> 

Howdy,
        I guess I'm just a lightweight, but most of the lists
_I_ manage are (well) under 10000 elements long ;-)  Thanks for
the corrections though.  I found that after "feeling good" about
nreverse alot of my code was made much cleaner.
        For big sequences, I'm fond of (vector-push) and (vector-
push-extend) .
        Happy lisping. (BTW, what's the fate of Lisp Pointer. I 
thought that it was defunct, but now I get a renewal notice in
the mail. Also read on net that some conference proceedings were
to be published as an issue. I only know that _I_ haven't 
received an issue in about six months ;-(

=============================================
Scott McLoughlin
Conscious Computing
=============================================
