From: Sean Philip Engelson
Subject: (Common) Lisp for Mac/Powerbook?
Date: 
Message-ID: <1f04moINN3r@STOVE.AI.CS.YALE.EDU>
I'm going to be purchasing an Apple Powerbook shortly, and would like to have
Lisp on it.  I'd be interested in hearing from people as to what Lisp's are
available and their experiences with them.  Generally, I'd prefer Common Lisp,
but I may take what I can get.  Cost is an issue (free would be great!) as is
disk space.  Graphics capability is a big plus.  I'll summarise responses to
the net.

Thanks in advance,
			-Sean-
-- 
Sean Philip (Shlomo) Engelson		
Yale Department of Computer Science	
Box 2158 Yale Station			
New Haven, CT 06520			
From: Agnar Aamodt
Subject: Re: (Common) Lisp for Mac/Powerbook?
Date: 
Message-ID: <agnar.aamodt-271192102356@129.241.164.107>
I have used Procyon Common Lisp on a Powerbook 170 for a while, and for
small and medium size programs at least (<10.000 lines of code) it runs
well. I also like the programming environment. There is no difference
running Lisp on a Powerbook compared to another Mac, it's a question of
memory, basically - and processor speed, of course. Procyon needs at least
2MB for itself, but 4 is preferable.

I would like to generalize the question into info about CommonLisps on the
Mac in general. In particular, how does Procyon compare to Mac Common Lisp?
Which is the one to set for? Are there other competitors at that level? An
advantage of Procyon is that the same system also is available on IBM type
PCs. Has anyone done any performance tests, or ease-of-programming tests
comparing the two?

Agnar Aamodt
Dep. of Informatics
University of Trondheim
Norway
From: Rainer Joswig
Subject: Re: (Common) Lisp for Mac/Powerbook?
Date: 
Message-ID: <joswig-281192142904@kimac9.informatik.uni-hamburg.de>
In article <·························@129.241.164.107>,
············@ifi.unit.no (Agnar Aamodt) wrote:

> I would like to generalize the question into info about CommonLisps on the
> Mac in general. In particular, how does Procyon compare to Mac Common Lisp?
> Which is the one to set for? Are there other competitors at that level? An
> advantage of Procyon is that the same system also is available on IBM type
> PCs. Has anyone done any performance tests, or ease-of-programming tests
> comparing the two?

As far as I know, there are only Procyon CL and Macintosh CL. Maybe
there will be a port of Medley ?

I haven't used Procyon CL lately, does it now support 32-Bit addressing?
It would be only useful if it would support System 7. Is CLIM
available for it?
But it sure is a nice implementation with the possibility of
developing for Mac, Windows and OS/2.


You should look at Macintosh CL 2.0 . It's a very nice implementation,
stable and with a very good support from Apple through Internet.
I also find the interface clearer compared to Procyon CL. CLIM is
available. The things I would like to see in the the next release
are multiple lisp processes and an implementation of the meta
object protocol for CLOS. But besides that, it is a very complete
common lisp development system. Support from the internet community
is also outstanding. Look at the directory /pub/mcl2/contrib on
cambridge.apple.com . There are some people writing cool stuff
for Macintosh CL. Apple delivers it with a CD-Rom with additional
source code, PD lisp code, online documentation, ...


Rainer Joswig
Email: ······@informatik.uni-hamburg.de
comp.lang.lisp / 1992 / nov