Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Series Expansion, post: 3861399"] No, YOU read the ASCII string and do syntactic analysis on it. I prefer to have tools that will do that sort of crap for me. To you guys, Lisp is like some magic elixir that grants lifelike behavior and extraordinary properties to anything infused with it, isn't it? Well, I've got news for you. Here in the real world, there ain't no silver bullet. No philosopher's stone. No magic spell a wizard can cast to make brooms come to life and carry water or whatever. Instead, we have this thing called "engineering". We actually have to figure something out and then build it to run on ordinary electricity or gasoline. And if something is impossible, it just plain won't work. READ EMILY POST PLEASE BEFORE SPEWING FORTH MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS UNTO THE NETS! Apparently, gugamilare disagrees. Prompts are so 1985. And wouldn't you need an MDI window system to have anywhere else for it to expand into BESIDES your source file? Yeah, yeah, that's what they all say. Fan-bloody-tastic. You know that can't possibly work reliably, right? It's one thing if the dependency analysis is done by automation when it's an external tool like automake. It's another if it's done by part of the same code base undergoing the dependency analysis. Now, the dependency analysis itself might affect the dependencies, which is precisely the kind of headache I was alluding to earlier with self- referentiality. SLIME must be magic, then, if it can grant the editor the knowledge that SuperVGA has been invented from *inside its internal script interpreter* without even a droplet of native C code to actually talk to the display hardware. It's amazing! It's fantastic! It makes Windows Plug'n'Pray obsolete! It's ... slime! Well, it's that or someone was wrong about SLIME being written entirely in an editor's scripting language, or you're wrong about what it can do, or (least plausible of all) someone's definition of "powerful IDE" allows the possibility of one being a prompt-driven terminal-mode archaism from the 80s. My personal theory is that someone's looking at all of this stuff through rose-colored glasses. I don't tend to comply with requests that are asked of me as rudely as that. Another personal attack, this time accusing me of lacking integrity and intellectual honesty? Wow, you must have completely run out of rational arguments in favor of dynamic typing if the only shots left in your quiver are this lame. No, the term "releases" indicates they followed a standard development model, perhaps somewhat accelerated but otherwise typical, rather than going the "no plans, no prototype, no backup" route. I quoted and responded to it right there, you dipshit! They used it to perform remote diagnostics, and subsequently to upload a patch. Nothing is implied about how that patch was developed and tested in the meantime. Consider though that experimenting with the live version on board the spacecraft, were this to shut it down or render it unable to receive or transmit signals, would have meant the loss of the multi-million-dollar probe. It stands to reason that they did nothing to modify the probe's code without extensive testing on the ground first. They could have launched it hosting a JVM with an attached debugger and still done what it's implied they did. Please read up on etiquette, polite society, civilization, and Emily Post before you continue posting personal attacks! [/QUOTE]

Verification