On 12/17/05, Partap Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is a .exe file absolutely required? > > > > I'm new to lisp as well (been lurking), and that's one thing that I've been > wondering about. What exactly is so hard about making a standalone > executable out of lisp source? In principle, I don't think there is anything hard about it. Corman CL, Lispworks and Allegro all support making "stand alone" executables. Lispworks will even make a single .exe file. I think Corman makes an exe either with or without a dll file that implements the lisp runtime. I don't know what allegro does, as I've never had a need to play with it.
I can't say why certain free lisps don't have this functionality other than *guessing* that it isn't very important to the implementors. And in reality, it is not a barrier for distributing applications. There are not a lot of windows programs I use that are only one file. They have dll files that get installed, resource files, etc. Java applications are seldom a single file, unless you make a jar. Mac applications hide the multitude of files in a .app bundle. With clisp, you really only need two things, the lisp driver exe and a core memory image, and maybe a driver bat file to start them. And if someone really cared about it, they could make a C program that replaced the bat file. All my program does is automate the generation of a core image file that contains all of the application code, and the bat file to run it. I think it also puts everything you need in a directory that you specify, which you can then zip up and send to someone. > > I can understand that if you want to be able to interact with the > source...say for debugging, you need access to the entire environment. But > what if you just want to package a binary for distribution? > > This kind of goes with the other thread about the standard library. > Somebody was mentioning that you would have to include the entire library > whether you used it or not. This is not true for programs written in other > languages. You either only link in the functions that are referenced in the > program, or dynamically link from a shared object file. > > Is there something so fundamental to the lisp language that the entire > environment needs to be distributed with a (possible very simple) program? > I love the idea of the interactive environment when developing code, but for > distribution, it seems akin to not only leaving the debugging symbols in > place, but attaching a copy of the debugger and standard libraries as > well... > > Is there something I'm missing? or is this just an issue with the various > free implementations that are available and not lisp in general? > > -partap > _______________________________________________ > Gardeners mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners > > > _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
