From: Roman Yangarber
Subject: What's the best Common Lisp implementation for Linux ?
Date: 
Message-ID: <roman.827216492@sapir>
Hi,

I'm looking for a complete distribution of Common Lisp that runs under
Linux.  The requirements are that it should be:
* fast,
* as nearly X3J13 compliant as possible,
* work with CLX.

Thanks for your help.

From: Benjamin Shults
Subject: Re: What's the best Common Lisp implementation for Linux ?
Date: 
Message-ID: <314EEDED.6C12DEAD@math.utexas.edu>
Roman Yangarber wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm looking for a complete distribution of Common Lisp that runs under
> Linux.  The requirements are that it should be:
> * fast,
> * as nearly X3J13 compliant as possible,
> * work with CLX.
> 
> Thanks for your help.

There are at least two free implementations which satisfy these conditions.
I use both of them.

http://sayre.sysc.pdx.edu:8001/clisp/

ftp://ftp.ma.utexas.edu/pup/gcl

Clisp seems closer to the newest standards to me.  GCL seems faster.
There is nothing scientific about either of those statements.
Both are still supported and being developed.  Both have mail
discussion lists.  Both install VERY easily on Linux.  I don't work
with CLX but I think both of these do.

You may also be able to get CMULisp

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/ai-repository/ai/lang/lisp/impl/cmucl/17f/source.tgz

to compile on Linux.  I haven't tried yet.  It is not supported or
developed any more though it is close to the standards.

-- 
Benjamin Shults                 Email:  ·······@math.utexas.edu
Department of Mathematics       Phone:  (512) 471-7711 ext. 208
University of Texas at Austin   WWW:    http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/bshults
Austin, TX  78712   USA
From: Martin Cracauer
Subject: Re: What's the best Common Lisp implementation for Linux ?
Date: 
Message-ID: <1996Mar20.181546.6182@wavehh.hanse.de>
Benjamin Shults <·······@math.utexas.edu> writes:

>You may also be able to get CMULisp

>http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/ai-repository/ai/lang/lisp/impl/cmucl/17f/source.tgz

>to compile on Linux.  I haven't tried yet.  

See my posting from a few weeks ago, it is much more to do than
recompiling. 

>It is not supported or
>developed any more though it is close to the standards.

It is not longer under development by its original groups of authors,
but a number of individuals provide help and bug fixes, in the news
and on the bugs mailing list. This should not be a reason not to use
CMU CL.

Determining how close the free Lisps are to ANSI CL is something that
should be done, BTW.

Martin
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <········@wavehh.hanse.de>  -  Fax +49 40 522 85 36
 BSD User Group Hamburg, Germany   http://www.bik-gmbh.de/~cracauer
From: Martin Cracauer
Subject: Re: What's the best Common Lisp implementation for Linux ?
Date: 
Message-ID: <1996Mar20.095046.4296@wavehh.hanse.de>
·····@sapir.cs.nyu.edu (Roman Yangarber) writes:

>I'm looking for a complete distribution of Common Lisp that runs under
>Linux.  The requirements are that it should be:
>* fast,
>* as nearly X3J13 compliant as possible,
>* work with CLX.

I am afraid you have to try by yourself. All free Common Lisp
implementations have strengths and weaknesses.

You may start with clisp and gcl. I feel clisp is more comfortable
(commandline-editing, ready-to-run-packages like clx and garnet), but
gcl's compiled code is generally faster. I did not compare their ANSI
compatiblity, but the READMEs wake the impression that gcl is more
agressively moving towards ANSI CL.

Martin
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <········@wavehh.hanse.de>  -  Fax +49 40 522 85 36
 BSD User Group Hamburg, Germany   http://www.bik-gmbh.de/~cracauer