Has anyone experimented with CL on OS X? Has anyone been successful? I
would rather not run MCL through the OS9 compatibility layer, a simple
unix implementation would be preferable.
Thanks,
Sunil
Sunil Mishra writes:
> Has anyone experimented with CL on OS X? Has anyone been successful? I
> would rather not run MCL through the OS9 compatibility layer, a simple
> unix implementation would be preferable.
I'm in the process of trying to install one. If I have any luck,
I'll post a followup. If you have any luck, I'd appreciate knowing
about it. My gut reaction is that there should be some way to make
CLISP and ECLS work on it, since they are byte-compilers and compile
through C, respectively, but not CMUCL or SBCL, since I'd have to
write a PowerPC assembler module for it.
But first, I have to get gcc running on my laptop...
--J
--
Johann Hibschman ······@physics.berkeley.edu
Sunil Mishra writes:
> Has anyone experimented with CL on OS X? Has anyone been successful? I
> would rather not run MCL through the OS9 compatibility layer, a simple
> unix implementation would be preferable.
Alas, I've just tried to compile both ECL-S and CLISP on it, without
any luck. I'm afraid I don't know enough of the internal bells and
whistles to do this on my own. I'll keep trying, but if anyone has
any luck, I'd like to know.
--J
--
Johann Hibschman ······@physics.berkeley.edu
In article <················@everest.com>, Sunil Mishra
<············@everest.com> wrote:
>Has anyone experimented with CL on OS X? Has anyone been successful? I
>would rather not run MCL through the OS9 compatibility layer, a simple
>unix implementation would be preferable.
Actually, you can't run MCL in Classic (the OS 9 compatibility layer) -
it won't work (low level access issues). Digitool has however begun a
port of MCL to MacOS X.
--
Raffael Cavallaro, Ph.D.
·······@mediaone.net
In article <·····························@news.ne.mediaone.net>,
Raffael Cavallaro <·······@mediaone.net> writes:
> In article <················@everest.com>, Sunil Mishra
> <············@everest.com> wrote:
>
>>Has anyone experimented with CL on OS X? Has anyone been successful? I
>>would rather not run MCL through the OS9 compatibility layer, a simple
>>unix implementation would be preferable.
>
>
> Actually, you can't run MCL in Classic (the OS 9 compatibility layer) -
> it won't work (low level access issues). Digitool has however begun a
> port of MCL to MacOS X.
>
Is there a known anticipated finish date? FreeBSD and MCL and I might have
to consider Apples again.
Mike McDonald
·······@mikemac.com
In article <····················@typhoon.aracnet.com>,
·······@mikemac.com wrote:
>Is there a known anticipated finish date? FreeBSD and MCL and I might have
>to consider Apples again.
Digitool has stated that a MacOS X version of MCL will be available when
MacOS X ships (i.e., when it's out of beta). Currently, that's slated
for next spring (unless Apple pushes it back again.)
BTW, just FYI, Digitool have already ported MCL to LinuxPPC (under
contract to NASA, I belive) so they do have some experience taking MCL
to a *nix OS on PPC. I for one take this as a very positive sign for the
MacOS X port. Apparently the biggest rewrites have to do with the memory
management since MCL classic fiddles with low level stuff which you're
not allowed to touch under MacOS X, or have to fiddle with in a
different way. They've said they're waiting for a patch to OS X from
Apple to allow their porting work to continue.
Ralph
--
Raffael Cavallaro, Ph.D.
·······@mediaone.net