On 24 Jan 2011, at 09:37, Yakov Zaytsev wrote: > Pascal, could you please also try your code with open-source free Lisp > implementations and give the numbers? :-)
I'm currently focusing on making everything work well on LispWorks before considering porting to other CL implementations. That's in general a good approach: First make things work well in one CL implementation, and worry about portability later. Portability is quite easy to achieve at a late stage with Lisp, but may distract you too much from the important concepts initially. Pascal > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Pascal Costanza <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The development platform is LispWorks 6.0, which comes with an excellent >>> library for SMP. (I would say it's the best of any dynamic language I am >>> currently aware of, not just those of Lisp dialects.) >> >> I would be interested on learning what aspects of LispWorks make it >> interesting for SMP, specially if some of those ideas can be adapted to ECL. >> Does their library provide a better granularity when controlling threads >> than C? Is it the inter-process communication? >> Juanjo >> >> -- >> Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC >> c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain) >> http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> pro mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro >> >> -- Pascal Costanza, mailto:[email protected], http://p-cos.net Vrije Universiteit Brussel Software Languages Lab Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium _______________________________________________ pro mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
