I suggest you try https://duckduckgo.com/ for searches like that - regexes, content categories, site-specific, all sorts of "goodies".
It hasn't replaced Google's other search modes for me, but feels like the first real good competitor for the standard web-search.
And BTW, They cater well to the privacy-concerned - they don't keep any info on you, use a redirect to remove your search terms when you click on a result, and will gladly operate over SSL for anything
and yet... southwest is an ITA customer, for the functionality on their own site (and possibly other authorized sales channels) though they still don't allow their fares to be used for cross-shopping search.
(former ITA employee who is currently wondering what his shares would be worth right now)
One of the goals of Parrot is to give any language running on it the capability of accessing functionality in libraries written in any other language. For example, a program written in Python could use CPAN modules written in Perl and libraries written in Lisp, presumably keeping a "native" python interface!
Now, as far as I'm concerned, such a thing is practically magic, but I do recognize that it has been done before, and the Parrot hackers are some very smart folks.
Stargate: Why simply beat a dead horse where it lay, when you can transport it anywhere in the universe?
And the specs Carl cites in that article has grown by an order of magnitude - in both amounts of data and hardware power, as well as the complexity of the requirements.
True, I ignored the original point - generally C|C++ is going to be faster than LISP, if the algorithms necessary can be expressed in similar terms in each language. However, when it comes to having to constantly change the code to support constantly changing requirements, a dynamic language like LISP has a great advantage over C++.
That said, the code doing the searching for Orbitz uses algorithms and architectural techniques that would take so much more "scaffolding" in C++ that it would not only hamper maintenance of the code, it would likely hamper innovation and invention of new algorithms and functionality.
LISP is certainly not popular, and in many cases, not the best or most practical tool for the job... but it is alive and well, and will continue to be available to those who can/need to use it for the foreseeable future.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo.
Did I ever mention that the slashdot posting filter is retarded?
One of the great things about going to LISA is that you get the proceedings and/or training for everything on CD or dead tree. (Well, nearly everything...I've heard that some people didn't or couldn't make their training materials available (though I've not been motivated to confirm this yet), and some of the talks didn't do this (Tom, where are your slides?)). There is some wonderful stuff to be found in them...
I recently purchased a home, and have no blueprints for it. I would like to be able to create a model of the house and systems on my computer so that I can easily reference it. I'd like to map out electrical circuits and fixtures, plumbing, doors, walls, etc. Being able to associate appropriate specs to a fixture (e.g. watts consumed, flow rate, etc) would be great.
The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.