simen
Joined 19 years ago
Joined 19 years ago
What you're asking for would have required an entirely different budget and likely would run counter to the point of the model. It's not a simulation.
I think it's an interesting idea, but it doesn't bode well when they seemingly choose the wrong target for comparison and hand-wave away the difference as insignificant.
The manual also states that it's for "a version of Lisp being prepared for the IBM 709", implying the manual was written while the interpreter was still being developed, and all references I've found state that the IBM 709 version was the first practical implementation.
More on the very early history of Lisp here: http://jmc.stanford.edu/articles/lisp/lisp.pdf
Of course the current government never had any plans to conduct any preliminary steps. The two major parties (the Conservatives and the Progress Party) are all for it, but the minor supporting parties (the Liberals and Christian Democrats) are not, and so far they've gotten their will.
At a guess, the author chose the syntax because it's familiar and easy to parse. Go's syntax is... eccentric where it differs from typical C-style languages.