On 12/15/05, Peter Seibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So as CL Gardeners dedicated to doing work that improves, however
> slightly the current situation, we have two choices here: we can
> attack the real or the perceived difficulties of getting a free Lisp
> environment that works on Windows. At the moment the situation on
> Windows for free (as in beer and/or speech) Lisps is this:
>
> [snip snip]
>
> 3) You can use Corman which is not quite free (as in beer) but is
> quite inexpensive. Not free as in speech. I think it also has some
> weird conformance idiosyncrasies but I've never really used it so I'm
> not in a good position to say what they are.
ASDF on Corman requires jumping through some hoops:
http://www.weitz.de/corman-asdf/
It's entirely possible that Roger Corman would be receptive
to patches (you get the source even though it's not free
as in freedom) to help address these idiosyncracies.
Also,
5) LispWorks is another non-free alternative with an eval
version, and it's not necessary to keep renewing the license.
> [snip]
>
> I'm not sure what exactly can be done about the perception problems
> except possibly to point out that with CLISP you get a cross-platform
> solution similar to what you get with Python or Perl. Or at least
> those languages as of a few years ago before they had threads. (Do
> folks really use threads in Perl and Python these days? I left Perl
> hacking before threads were really soup.) Are there other perceived
> difficulties that we could do something to mitigate?
I think there is a perception (might be my imagination, though)
that compiling CLISP's bytecode to native binaries is important.
I think it's listed as a potential project at the CLISP homepage.
It's hard to say whether the result would be worth the effort
required to implement that, without doing some prototyping
and benchmarking.
--
Jack
_______________________________________________
Gardeners mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
