Hi,
I was persuaded to look into learning LISP, but, while there are quite
a lot of documentation on-line, I find it difficult to find some
tutorials for that would make sense with GCL ... I arrived at
believing that every LISP implementation has it's own ``specialties''
that the tutorial writers cannot help using in the first pages :(
Can you point me to such texts?
Is it a solution to go over Scheme, and shift later to LISP, by
readind the references? In one of the Scheme tutorials it was written
that basic coding in LISP(s) and Scheme is quite the same ...
How is GCL rated? It seems to fit my needs: it is claimed to compile
to machine code, has Tk bindings, and comes with Slackware 8.0 (this
is the reasons for me choosing it).
I read high praises of clisp on this list. Since there is no clisp
package for Slackware, I might try to build it from source. However, I
worked only with Perl and Tcl. Would it be a really tough job
compiling clisp on Slackware 8.0? I mean, if you say it isn't, and I
won't succeed from the first few attempts, I'll try harder :)
thanks,
Emil Per.
·······@yahoo.com (Emil Perhinschi) writes:
> I was persuaded to look into learning LISP, but, while there are quite
> a lot of documentation on-line, I find it difficult to find some
> tutorials for that would make sense with GCL ... I arrived at
GCL is not widely used (relative to other implementations) and
implements an obsolete dialect of the language. I'd urge you to look
at one of the other offerings. If you're using GCL because you like
the "Gnu" moniker, try Gnu CLisp, which is a widely-used "modern"
implementation. If you're not bothered by a BSD license, there's
CMUCL, which compiles to (very fast) native machine code. If you're
not bothered by commercial software (you shouldn't be), there's also
the "personal" offerings from Franz and XAnalys, which you can
download for free from their websites.
> believing that every LISP implementation has it's own ``specialties''
> that the tutorial writers cannot help using in the first pages :(
Every Lisp implementation has it's own specialties, but all ANSI
Common Lisp implementations have a common core. You may be confused
on this because GCL is not an ANSI Common Lisp.
> Can you point me to such texts?
http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/dst/www/LispBook/index.html
http://www.psg.com/~dlamkins/sl/cover.html
There are plenty of tutorials out there. If your programming
experience is limited (Perl ;)), the first one there would be a good
place to start.
> Is it a solution to go over Scheme, and shift later to LISP, by
> reading the references? In one of the Scheme tutorials it was written
> that basic coding in LISP(s) and Scheme is quite the same ...
No it is not a solution. The Scheme tutorial was lying.
> I read high praises of clisp on this list. Since there is no clisp
> package for Slackware, I might try to build it from source. However, I
Building CLisp from source is (in my experience) a matter of untarring
it, ./configure'ing it, and make'ing it.
CMUCL is much harder to build, but a good solution to that is not to
build it. :) You can download pre-packaged binary installs from CMUCL's
web site at www.cons.org/cmucl.
Gabe Garza
On Sun, 28 Apr 2002 21:29:07 GMT, Charlie & <·······@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> implementation. If you're not bothered by a BSD license, there's
> CMUCL, which compiles to (very fast) native machine code. If you're
In case you are implying that CMU CL is distributed under a BSD-like
license, note that it is actually in the public domain.
Paolo
--
EncyCMUCLopedia * Extensive collection of CMU Common Lisp documentation
http://www.paoloamoroso.it/ency/README
[http://cvs2.cons.org:8000/cmucl/doc/EncyCMUCLopedia/]
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:04:31 +0200, Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it>
wrote:
> In case you are implying that CMU CL is distributed under a BSD-like
> license, note that it is actually in the public domain.
Or more, precisely, it is in the public domain except for a few subsystems,
possibly only MIT CLX (MIT license).
Paolo
--
EncyCMUCLopedia * Extensive collection of CMU Common Lisp documentation
http://www.paoloamoroso.it/ency/README
[http://cvs2.cons.org:8000/cmucl/doc/EncyCMUCLopedia/]
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> writes:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:04:31 +0200, Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it>
> wrote:
>
> > In case you are implying that CMU CL is distributed under a BSD-like
> > license, note that it is actually in the public domain.
>
> Or more, precisely, it is in the public domain except for a few subsystems,
> possibly only MIT CLX (MIT license).
Actually, CLX, PCL, and LOOP are copyrighted.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
From: Brian P Templeton
Subject: Re: learning LISP; GCL; clisp
Date:
Message-ID: <874rhrjxya.fsf@tunes.org>
Charlie & <·······@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> ·······@yahoo.com (Emil Perhinschi) writes:
>
>> I was persuaded to look into learning LISP, but, while there are quite
>> a lot of documentation on-line, I find it difficult to find some
>> tutorials for that would make sense with GCL ... I arrived at
>
> GCL is not widely used (relative to other implementations) and
> implements an obsolete dialect of the language. I'd urge you to look
> at one of the other offerings. If you're using GCL because you like
> the "Gnu" moniker, try Gnu CLisp, which is a widely-used "modern"
> implementation. If you're not bothered by a BSD license, there's
> CMUCL, which compiles to (very fast) native machine code.
There's also SBCL, which was originally a CMUCL fork, but is more
maintainable and much easier to compile than CMUCL. (Like CMUCL, SBCL
is in the public domain, with a few parts of it under a BSD license.)
<URL:http://sbcl.sourceforge.net/>
> If you're not bothered by commercial software (you shouldn't be),
> there's also the "personal" offerings from Franz and XAnalys, which
> you can download for free from their websites.
>
>> believing that every LISP implementation has it's own ``specialties''
>> that the tutorial writers cannot help using in the first pages :(
>
> Every Lisp implementation has it's own specialties, but all ANSI
> Common Lisp implementations have a common core. You may be confused
> on this because GCL is not an ANSI Common Lisp.
>
>> Can you point me to such texts?
>
> http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/dst/www/LispBook/index.html
> http://www.psg.com/~dlamkins/sl/cover.html
>
> There are plenty of tutorials out there. If your programming
> experience is limited (Perl ;)), the first one there would be a good
> place to start.
>
>> Is it a solution to go over Scheme, and shift later to LISP, by
>> reading the references? In one of the Scheme tutorials it was written
>> that basic coding in LISP(s) and Scheme is quite the same ...
>
> No it is not a solution. The Scheme tutorial was lying.
>
>> I read high praises of clisp on this list. Since there is no clisp
>> package for Slackware, I might try to build it from source. However, I
>
> Building CLisp from source is (in my experience) a matter of untarring
> it, ./configure'ing it, and make'ing it.
>
> CMUCL is much harder to build, but a good solution to that is not to
> build it. :) You can download pre-packaged binary installs from CMUCL's
> web site at www.cons.org/cmucl.
>
> Gabe Garza
--
BPT <···@tunes.org> /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
backronym for Linux: \ / No HTML or RTF in mail
Linux Is Not Unix X No MS-Word in mail
Meme plague ;) ---------> / \ Respect Open Standards
Charlie & <·······@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> ·······@yahoo.com (Emil Perhinschi) writes:
>
> > I was persuaded to look into learning LISP, but, while there are quite
> it, ./configure'ing it, and make'ing it.
...
>
> CMUCL is much harder to build, but a good solution to that is not to
> build it. :) You can download pre-packaged binary installs from CMUCL's
> web site at www.cons.org/cmucl.
>
> Gabe Garza
Just did an cmucl install on RedHat Linux 7.1 with the
downloaded files from (I think):
http://www.pmsf.de/pub/cmucl/release/18d/
Download the
cmucl-18d-x86-linux.tar.bz2
and
cmucl-18d-x86-linux.extra.tar.bz2
Only did a check on the starting of cmucl and all was OK.
--
Emil Perhinschi wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I was persuaded to look into learning LISP, but, while there are quite
>a lot of documentation on-line, I find it difficult to find some
>tutorials for that would make sense with GCL ... I arrived at
>believing that every LISP implementation has it's own ``specialties''
>that the tutorial writers cannot help using in the first pages :(
>
>Can you point me to such texts?
>
>Is it a solution to go over Scheme, and shift later to LISP, by
>readind the references? In one of the Scheme tutorials it was written
>that basic coding in LISP(s) and Scheme is quite the same ...
>
>How is GCL rated? It seems to fit my needs: it is claimed to compile
>to machine code, has Tk bindings, and comes with Slackware 8.0 (this
>is the reasons for me choosing it).
>
>I read high praises of clisp on this list. Since there is no clisp
>package for Slackware, I might try to build it from source. However, I
>worked only with Perl and Tcl. Would it be a really tough job
>compiling clisp on Slackware 8.0? I mean, if you say it isn't, and I
>won't succeed from the first few attempts, I'll try harder :)
>
>thanks,
>
>Emil Per.
>
>
Have you tried your local library? This is a great resource often
overlooked in this
internet age. Here in Tampa, Fl. everything can be done over the
Internet. In addition,
if your local library doesn't carry the book, they frequently have an
interlibrary loan
service which looks first in your general area, and then nation wide.
It's most unlikely
that any book in which you are interested will not be found in the
nationwide system.
Regards,
Jeff Stephens
>
> I read high praises of clisp on this list. Since there is no clisp
> package for Slackware, I might try to build it from source. However, I
> worked only with Perl and Tcl. Would it be a really tough job
> compiling clisp on Slackware 8.0? I mean, if you say it isn't, and I
> won't succeed from the first few attempts, I'll try harder :)
>
I am at this moment on a Slackware 8.0 box with clisp installed. I
installed it sometime ago and honestly I don't remember precisely if
there were any difficulties, but I think it was completely
straightforward. Just get the source and follow the directions and I'm
pretty sure you'll be okay.
·······@yahoo.com (Emil Perhinschi) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
[snip]
> I read high praises of clisp on this list. Since there is no clisp
> package for Slackware, I might try to build it from source. However, I
> worked only with Perl and Tcl. Would it be a really tough job
> compiling clisp on Slackware 8.0? I mean, if you say it isn't, and I
> won't succeed from the first few attempts, I'll try harder :)
>
I have a feeling that if you can get Slackware installed you could
manage clisp. It pretty much follows the configure;make;make install
routine (it's a *bit* different, but not much).
As long as you have an Intel based box it should "work out of the
box." I say this because it won't build on my SuSE 7.3 Sparc box.
Damond