X or UNIX or Linux LISP?

From: adam
Subject: X or UNIX or Linux LISP?
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <950925480.1536851486@news.freeserve.co.uk>

Hi kids


I compile with allegro 5 PC, but I'd much rather have a Linux X version with
similar features, as swapping over to Win9x every time I need to use LISP is
driving me mad.

So far I've been unable to find a decent and stable LISP implementation on 586
linux.

Maybe someone knows better?


Please let me know.



Ad.

Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP? Jon S Anthony
- Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP? Hartmann Schaffer
Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP? Eugene Zaikonnikov
Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP? Tim Bradshaw
Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP? Robert Monfera

From: Jon S Anthony
Subject: Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP?
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <38ADFA9A.3CA3@synquiry.com>

adam wrote:
> 
> I compile with allegro 5 PC, but I'd much rather have a Linux X
> version with similar features
... 
> So far I've been unable to find a decent and stable LISP
> implementation on 586 linux.
> 
> Maybe someone knows better?

Yes, Allegro 5.0.1 for Linux.

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd. Belmont, MA 02478, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari

From: Hartmann Schaffer
Subject: Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP?
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <38b04376.0@flint.sentex.net>

In article <··············@tninkpad.telent.net>,
	Daniel Barlow <···@tninkpad.telent.net> writes:
> ...
> Clisp: was http://clisp.cons.org, but has moved to sourceforge - try
> http://clisp.sourceforge.net

i recently downloaded the 19999-07-22 source and tried to build it.
make failed because it couldn't finf the file arit80386.c.  apparently
some step up to makemake missed ot specifying the target machine (there
is a file arit80836.d, which is to be processed to produce arit80386.c
the install document seems not to mention these details.  does anybody
know how to force this?

> ...

tia

-- 

Hartmann Schaffer

It is better to fill your days with life than your life with days

From: Eugene Zaikonnikov
Subject: Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP?
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <88m0q2$jls$1@nnrp1.deja.com>

In article <····················@news.freeserve.co.uk>,
  adam <····@hulksmash.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> I compile with allegro 5 PC, but I'd much rather have a Linux

> So far I've been unable to find a decent and stable LISP
> implementation on 586 linux.
>
What makes you think that ACL for Linux is unstable? Or Lispworks? Or
CMUCL?

--
  Eugene.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

From: Tim Bradshaw
Subject: Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP?
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <ey3og9ducex.fsf@cley.com>

* adam  wrote:
> Hi kids

> So far I've been unable to find a decent and stable LISP implementation o=
> n 586
> linux.

ACL runs on Linux (and is supported there too).

--tim

From: Robert Monfera
Subject: Re: X or UNIX or Linux LISP?
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0000
Message-ID: <38AE39AC.4DA28F70@fisec.com>

adam wrote:

> I'd much rather have a Linux X version with
> similar features

ACL should work with X.  The LispWorks GUI (CAPI) and IDE are
practically the same across platforms.

Robert