From: Mike Loux
Subject: CLISP vs. MCL
Date: 
Message-ID: <mloux.2.746977289@rm42.ucc.uconn.edu>
Hello All,

	Well, the I got a few mail responses to my post about finding a DOS 
version of LISP which would run code that was usable on MCL 2.0.  The 
general agreement was that CLISP was the best bet.  I have it and am 
starting to fiddle around with it, and wanted to thank all those people who 
responded, and say that I got the answer I was looking for.  THANKS!

-Mikus

P.S. and I didn't even have to smoke any flames!  Wow! ;-)
From: YOUNG U RYU
Subject: Re: CLISP vs. MCL
Date: 
Message-ID: <2659pg$26f@news.utdallas.edu>
In article <·················@rm42.ucc.uconn.edu> ·····@rm42.ucc.uconn.edu (Mike Loux) writes:
>Hello All,
>
>	Well, the I got a few mail responses to my post about finding a DOS 
>version of LISP which would run code that was usable on MCL 2.0.  The 
>general agreement was that CLISP was the best bet.  I have it and am 
>starting to fiddle around with it, and wanted to thank all those people who 
>responded, and say that I got the answer I was looking for.  THANKS!

One thing about DOS version of CLISP:
There is a compiled one available, but it is a bit out-of-dated.
For example, DEFPACKAGE of CLtL2 is not available
from the compiled one. The most current CLISP fully implements
CLtL1 and a few functions of CLtL2 such as DEFPACKAGE.

If you want to run some famous LISP macros, such as SCREAMER,
you should have the most recent version, not the compiled one.

The most recent CLISP is available as C codes. You should
have EMX/GCC to compile it. Compilation is fairly mechanical
and easy. (You don't need knowledge of C!)

>
>-Mikus
>
>P.S. and I didn't even have to smoke any flames!  Wow! ;-)

Young
From: ······@ma2s2.mathematik.uni-karlsruhe.de
Subject: Re: CLISP vs. MCL
Date: 
Message-ID: <267auq$50f@nz12.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>
······@utdallas.edu (YOUNG U RYU) writes:

> One thing about DOS version of CLISP:
> There is a compiled one available, but it is a bit out-of-dated.
> For example, DEFPACKAGE of CLtL2 is not available
> from the compiled one. The most current CLISP fully implements
> CLtL1 and a few functions of CLtL2 such as DEFPACKAGE.
>
> If you want to run some famous LISP macros, such as SCREAMER,
> you should have the most recent version, not the compiled one.

This is not true any more. The latest DOS binaries on
ma2s2.mathematik.uni-karlsruhe.de:/pub/lisp/clisp/binaries/dos/
have been built on August 23rd. They are up to date and include DEFPACKAGE
as well as CLISP's new native CLOS.


                    Bruno Haible
                    ······@ma2s2.mathematik.uni-karlsruhe.de
comp.lang.lisp / 1993 / sep