We've been developing intelligent tutoring systems for math as a
research project under MCL and are now looking to commercialize our
systems, which means we need to produce MS Windows versions.
Franz's licensing for Allegro CL is prohibitively expensive, so we're
looking for other alternatives. Harlequin's LispWorks looks good from
their description, but I don't know anyone using it.
Do I have anything to worry about with LispWorks? Is it a reasonably
complete CL? Is the performance OK? Are there any showstoppers?
Since we're mostly porting from MCL, I'm not too concerned with the
development environment -- more with the runtime. Also, I know that
LW4.1 Pro isn't out yet, so I'll need to generalize from 4.0.1, but I
just want to get a sense of whether there's any reason to look elsewhere.
Thanks for any info,
Steve Ritter
·······@cmu.edu
It does? So far, I've been doing most of the work! :-)
\
Let's see Kent come up with an unbiased opinion on this one. :-)
/
Uugh! Can't do ascii art with variable width font!
But seriously, can a company that does the HyperSpec do a bad Lisp?
That wouldn't be good <as if I have a clue>.
--
David Steuber (ver 1.31.2a)
http://www.david-steuber.com
To reply by e-mail, replace trashcan with david.
So I have this chicken, see? And it hatched from this egg, see? But
the egg wasn't laid by a chicken. It was cross-laid by a turkey.
Steven Ritter <········@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> We've been developing intelligent tutoring systems for math as a
> research project under MCL and are now looking to commercialize our
> systems, which means we need to produce MS Windows versions.
>
> Franz's licensing for Allegro CL is prohibitively expensive, so we're
> looking for other alternatives. Harlequin's LispWorks looks good from
> their description, but I don't know anyone using it.
>
> Do I have anything to worry about with LispWorks? Is it a reasonably
> complete CL? Is the performance OK? Are there any showstoppers?
>
> Since we're mostly porting from MCL, I'm not too concerned with the
> development environment -- more with the runtime. Also, I know that
> LW4.1 Pro isn't out yet, so I'll need to generalize from 4.0.1, but I
> just want to get a sense of whether there's any reason to look elsewhere.
>
> Thanks for any info,
>
> Steve Ritter
> ·······@cmu.edu
I've only used the unix version of lispworks. Well, at least to do anything
serious. I like it. I have no basis for comparison with Allegro, so I don't
really have much more to add :-)
Sunil
Sunil Mishra wrote:
> > Franz's licensing for Allegro CL is prohibitively expensive, so we're
> > looking for other alternatives. Harlequin's LispWorks looks good from
> > their description, but I don't know anyone using it.
I am using it. As for speed, I compared it to acl 3.0.2 and lispworks was
*much*
faster when optimzations were cranked up; in fact, calling disassemble left me
with the
impression that a fully typed (speed 3)(safety 0)(debug 0) function would run
as fast
as the corresponding C function. It does seem reasonably complete, if a little
rough
around the edges. I haven't hit a showstopper yet.
dave