From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: free lisp compilers? Date: 1999/09/06 Message-ID: <3145603507247003@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 521625121 References: <7qmg3n$tls$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7qmsvi$7nb$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7qofki$aeb$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <4nvh9rk5qm.fsf@rtp.ericsson.se> <3145519936974680@naggum.no> mail-copies-to: never X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 936614708 9694 193.71.66.49 (6 Sep 1999 10:45:08 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; +1 510 435 8604; http://www.naggum.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Sep 1999 10:45:08 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * Marco Antoniotti | Note that the biggest claim put forth to support the use of CL over C++ | (or other languages) is also not quite provable: i.e. the fact that | "programmer productivity" is improved over C++ productivity. There is no | data supporting this claim. on the contrary, there are heaps of data to support this claim, but it does not meet some people's requirements for valid data. of course, any such data is rife with serious problems. yet, people experience it all the time, especially if they write _robust_ C++ code. (if they don't, they may well win on all sorts of counts, but we all know that it's very, very hard work to make C and C++ programs fail gracefully.) #:Erik -- save the children: just say NO to sex with pro-lifers