From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: Theory #51 (superior(?) programming languages)
Date: 1997/01/26
Message-ID: <3063227791126192@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 212225264
references: <5c5c65$9ed@news-rocq.inria.fr> <E4FC0G.93t@midway.uchicago.edu> 	<32E6CA6E.45B5@netright.com> <3063010159007887@naggum.no> 	<32E7D7C3.60ED@netright.com> <3063055314263603@naggum.no> 	<32E8FEC9.1F11@netright.com> <3063147946409477@naggum.no> 	<8gd8uuxpo2.fsf@galapagos.cse.psu.edu> <3063183095872312@naggum.no> <8gafpxyaoc.fsf@galapagos.cse.psu.edu>
mail-copies-to: never
organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313; http://www.naggum.no
newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme


* Scott Schwartz
| I don't think it does even out the costs.  For one thing, you didn't
| measure the cost of (load "lotto.o").

you're being stupid on purpose.  you don't include compilation, assembling,
and linking time in C programs, so why do you do it for Lisp?  go away.

#\Erik
-- 
1,3,7-trimethylxanthine -- a basic ingredient in quality software.