<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
<br>
Ron Garret wrote:
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:37BF0139-EF00-4C49-AEED-0ECFE27B630F@flownet.com"><br>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Serious question: why does portability matter to you so much? Back in
the day, portability mattered because DARPA said it mattered. Those
days are long gone. Do we really need to be able to port code between
five different implementations nowadays? Are the benefits really
worth the costs?
</pre>
</blockquote>
For what it's worth, we keep our code portable between<br>
CCL and SBCL, and have buildbots that automatically<br>
compile and test it in both, on the grounds that we<br>
get better testing that way. Sometimes we get interesting<br>
compiler warnings from one implementation that aren't<br>
produced by the other.<br>
<br>
-- Dan<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:37BF0139-EF00-4C49-AEED-0ECFE27B630F@flownet.com">
<pre wrap="">
rg
_______________________________________________
Openmcl-devel mailing list
<a href="mailto:Openmcl-devel@clozure.com" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated">Openmcl-devel@clozure.com</a>
<a href="http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>