From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!jfk3-feed1.news.digex.net!dca6-feed2.news.digex.net!intermedia!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!news100.world-online.no!news100.world-online.no!news01.chello.no!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: MD5 in LISP and abstraction inversions References: <87lmhrznup.fsf@Samaris.tunes.org> <3213559409134408@naggum.net> <877ktazjmt.fsf@Samaris.tunes.org> <3213617417316421@naggum.net> <87y9lqxluc.fsf@Samaris.tunes.org> <87hes6ur38.fsf@pps.jussieu.fr> Mail-Copies-To: never From: Erik Naggum Message-ID: <3214224370524670@naggum.net> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 18 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 16:05:52 GMT X-Complaints-To: abuse@chello.no X-Trace: news01.chello.no 1005235552 212.186.234.171 (Thu, 08 Nov 2001 17:05:52 MET) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 17:05:52 MET Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:19397 * Juliusz Chroboczek | It is most definitely possible to write portable Common Lisp code that | is efficient in one implementation. It is very difficult, and possibly | impossible, to write Common Lisp code that is portably efficient. Do you think this is because of the implementations or the language? I think it is because of the implementations and the lack of pressure from their users to be (more) efficient. If you write code that is explicit in all its assumptions, a compiler _should_ be able to produce optimal machine code. /// -- Norway is now run by a priest from the fundamentalist Christian People's Party, the fifth largest party representing one eighth of the electorate. -- Carrying a Swiss Army pocket knife in Oslo, Norway, is a criminal offense.