Subject: Re: PLOT: A non-parenthesized, infix Lisp!
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:59:04 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.scheme
Message-ID: <>
Dmitry A. Kazakov <> wrote:
| Secondly, as an alternative to Lisp I propose a random generator of
| hexadecimal machine code. Any sequence of machine codes is a correct
| program.

Not true! In most ISPs there are sequences which will cause
"Illegal Instruction" traps and/or machine checks. Such programs
are, by definition, incorrect.

| It would not smoke the CPU, you know.

That's also not true on certain CPUs. [E.g., on most of the MIPS ISPs,
which have software-maintained fully-associative TLBs, putting multiple
PTEs into the TLB which overlap address ranges *can* literally "smoke"
(or at least overheat to the point of damage) the CPU!]

| > I don't see how having the programs I'd like to write be rejected
| > is a productivity win.
| Random generator is greatly more productive.

Hmmm... Random code ==> Causes machine check which cannot be cleared
without power-cycling the machine. Strange definition of "productive"...


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607