Hi all,
I've been asked to find a good cheap/free (sound familiar?) CL with CLOS
support. We've had akcl for some time, but I can find no mention of the
object system in it's readmes or docs (I'm not a lisp practitioner, I just
run the machines). I just spotted the release note for the CMU CL distrib-
ution, and that does offer CLOS in some form.
I guess the question is: is CMU CL the way to go (no offence guys!)? Or is
there another CL with CLOS out there on the net somewhere that might be
better?
TIA, replies by mail puh-leez.
Oh, and yes - I always hate this kind of posting too 8-)
+-Brent Summers, U of Waikato, NZ----------------------------------------+
| "Laugh and the world ignores you. Crying doesn't help either." |
| All opinions expressed are, of course, solely my own errors. |
··························································@waikato.ac.nz-+
From: Jeff Dalton
Subject: Re: Free CL with CLOS: advice?
Date:
Message-ID: <7416@skye.ed.ac.uk>
In article <·····················@waikato.ac.nz> ···@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>Hi all,
>
>I've been asked to find a good cheap/free (sound familiar?) CL with CLOS
>support. We've had akcl for some time, but I can find no mention of the
>object system in it's readmes or docs (I'm not a lisp practitioner, I just
>run the machines). I just spotted the release note for the CMU CL distrib-
>ution, and that does offer CLOS in some form.
>
>I guess the question is: is CMU CL the way to go (no offence guys!)? Or is
>there another CL with CLOS out there on the net somewhere that might be
>better?
CMU CL is excellent if you have a machine it will run on. (I'd
like a 386/486 port, but it looks like I won't get one, because
a 386 is the wrong kind of machine in terms of number of registers,
among other things.)
PCL (the nearly-portable CLOS) will run in KCL. It works fairly well
but can be a bit of a pain when CLOS calls COMPILE (which is slow in
KCL).
What I'd like to see is for [A]KCL to catch up with CLtL II / the
spANS and for PCL-in-KCL to be able to avoid both COMPILE and the
pessimizing process you get if you just make COMPILE a no-op.
-- Jd
Ok, so I didn't send via e-mail. Sorry.