Subject: Re: Big Numbers
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:06:18 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Erik Naggum
| I can imagine it.  It does not take more than two languages that differ
| only in their bignum support, and considering the proliferation of both
| languages and implementations-called-languages, this situation will come
| up if it has not already.

* Barry Margolin
| I thought we were discussing choosing languages, not implementations.

  "Implementations-called-languages" was a reference to the many languages
  that have only one implementation of themselves, barely meriting the
  "language" label.  I have no idea what you thought it meant, but it seems
  you grew hostile because of it.

| But I interpreted the original question as whether built-in bignum
| support, considered all by itself, would be sufficient reason to choose
| Lisp for a particular application.

  That seems like an unwarranted interpretation -- it is obviously so silly
  it would cause people to become hostile if they indeed meant such a thing.

  I interpreted it as a _necessary_ condition, not at all _sufficient_, or
  if you really have to: a sufficient reason to _reject_ a language, but
  not choose it.

  Norway is now run by a priest from the fundamentalist Christian People's
  Party, the fifth largest party representing one eighth of the electorate.