Hello All!
I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it, more
I like it. Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials; but I need
to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my Linux box.
Anyone can help me? I will appreciate a lot!
TIA!
William Murat
············@bol.com.br (W Murat) writes:
> Hello All!
>
>
> I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it, more
> I like it. Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials; but I need
> to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my Linux box.
> Anyone can help me? I will appreciate a lot!
It depends on what you want to use it for, and what you mean by
"free". There are free-of-charge personal-use slightly-crippled
versions of the commercial Lisp systems (LispWorks and Allegro Common
Lisp) -- but they come with nice development environments. The two
best general-purpose Free-as-in-free-software lisps for Linux are
CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
portable to everything under the sun; it's usually fast enough, and
has really really really fast bignum (large integer) support. Like,
generally faster than anything else in any language (in my
experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
runs on a few architectures on Unix(-like OSes). They've both got
good and bad points, but for a new user, the differences aren't too
big. Get one or both (depending on your bandwidth), Emacs, and ILISP
(the Emacs<->CL interface), and you've got yourself the standard
Free-software CL environment.
( ILISP is nice, but a pain to set up; if you're not familiar with
Emacs, and don't run Debian [where it's easy to set up], you might
consider Hemlock, the Emacs-like editor that comes with CMUCL. It
comes with a nice users manual, and comes already set up. )
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) wrote in message news:<···············@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU>...
> ············@bol.com.br (W Murat) writes:
>
> > Hello All!
> >
> >
> > I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it, more
> > I like it. Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials; but I need
> > to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my Linux box.
> > Anyone can help me? I will appreciate a lot!
>
> It depends on what you want to use it for, and what you mean by
> "free". There are free-of-charge personal-use slightly-crippled
> versions of the commercial Lisp systems (LispWorks and Allegro Common
> Lisp) -- but they come with nice development environments. The two
> best general-purpose Free-as-in-free-software lisps for Linux are
> CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
> portable to everything under the sun; it's usually fast enough, and
> has really really really fast bignum (large integer) support. Like,
> generally faster than anything else in any language (in my
> experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
> runs on a few architectures on Unix(-like OSes). They've both got
> good and bad points, but for a new user, the differences aren't too
> big. Get one or both (depending on your bandwidth), Emacs, and ILISP
> (the Emacs<->CL interface), and you've got yourself the standard
> Free-software CL environment.
>
> ( ILISP is nice, but a pain to set up; if you're not familiar with
> Emacs, and don't run Debian [where it's easy to set up], you might
> consider Hemlock, the Emacs-like editor that comes with CMUCL. It
> comes with a nice users manual, and comes already set up. )
>
> --
> /|_ .-----------------------.
> ,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
> ,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
> / / `-----------------------'
> ( -. |
> | ) |
> (`-. '--.)
> `. )----'
Thanks a lot for your response!
William Murat
From: Simo Melenius
Subject: Re: I need to know the best free Lisp for Linux
Date:
Message-ID: <mutit8kc8kh.fsf@alya.utu.fi>
···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
[...]
> experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
This might be a good thread to ask a newbie question: is there any GUI
toolkit for CMUCL/CLISP that'd be a pretty much the de facto standard
for creating graphical user interfaces and displaying graphics on
unix-like systems? By de facto standard I mean something that I could
expect to find in the majority of Linux/Unix systems. I would be happy
to find something as common as Tcl/Tk for the Tcl language, which
usually installs by default on e.g. any Linux system.
I've been looking for one. CLX seems to be quite a broadly used but
it's X11 lib and, thus, pretty lowlevel. Then, you have some Motif
packages for at least CMUCL, but I'm not sure if it comes as a
standard package in most of the distributions. I'd like to see my
Common Lisp programs being easily runnable on different X11-based
Unix/Linux platforms. Third, rep-gtk is snappy and GTK is really
nice. However, rep-gtk is not Common Lisp but rather an emacsish lisp
IIRC and not very complete package for general purpose programming,
according to my experiences.
If CLISP had GTK+ bindings, that'd be superb. I think the Scheme has a
pretty complete GTK-binding (with Guile?) but I prefer Common Lisp
over Scheme. I haven't found any, yet. I also have the impression that
CLisp + CLX + Garnet would be an extensive combination but I'm not
sure if Garnet is easily available for many people.
Any piece of knowledge welcome!
best regards,
Simo
--
0110011001101111011011110110001001100001011100100010110101110000
Simo Melenius <······@utu.fi> writes:
> ···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
>
> > CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
> [...]
> > experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
>
> This might be a good thread to ask a newbie question: is there any GUI
> toolkit for CMUCL/CLISP that'd be a pretty much the de facto standard
> for creating graphical user interfaces and displaying graphics on
> unix-like systems? By de facto standard I mean something that I could
> expect to find in the majority of Linux/Unix systems. I would be happy
> to find something as common as Tcl/Tk for the Tcl language, which
> usually installs by default on e.g. any Linux system.
Well, I don't think any Linux systems tend to install any CL
environments by default, so the situation's going to be a little
different. I'm guessing you mean that, in addition to the lisp
system, you don't want the user to have to install other libraries?
> I've been looking for one. CLX seems to be quite a broadly used but
> it's X11 lib and, thus, pretty lowlevel. Then, you have some Motif
> packages for at least CMUCL, but I'm not sure if it comes as a
> standard package in most of the distributions. I'd like to see my
> Common Lisp programs being easily runnable on different X11-based
> Unix/Linux platforms. Third, rep-gtk is snappy and GTK is really
> nice. However, rep-gtk is not Common Lisp but rather an emacsish lisp
> IIRC and not very complete package for general purpose programming,
> according to my experiences.
CLM is probably a good be for you -- I'm pretty sure LessTif or
OpenMotif comes standard in most distributions. Also, there is a CL
binding for gtk <http://ww.telent.net/cliki/clg>.
> If CLISP had GTK+ bindings, that'd be superb. I think the Scheme has a
> pretty complete GTK-binding (with Guile?) but I prefer Common Lisp
> over Scheme. I haven't found any, yet. I also have the impression that
> CLisp + CLX + Garnet would be an extensive combination but I'm not
> sure if Garnet is easily available for many people.
Well, it's as available as you make it. Your application will need to
install itself, right? It can check if Garnet is installed, and, if
not, install a copy internally for itself. Or you could package it up
for the platforms you care about. I know someone was going to package
it up for CClAN.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@firestorm.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> Simo Melenius <······@utu.fi> writes:
[...]
> > I've been looking for one. CLX seems to be quite a broadly used but
> > it's X11 lib and, thus, pretty lowlevel. Then, you have some Motif
> > packages for at least CMUCL, but I'm not sure if it comes as a
> > standard package in most of the distributions. I'd like to see my
> > Common Lisp programs being easily runnable on different X11-based
> > Unix/Linux platforms. Third, rep-gtk is snappy and GTK is really
> > nice. However, rep-gtk is not Common Lisp but rather an emacsish lisp
> > IIRC and not very complete package for general purpose programming,
> > according to my experiences.
>
> CLM is probably a good be for you -- I'm pretty sure LessTif or
> OpenMotif comes standard in most distributions. Also, there is a CL
> binding for gtk <http://ww.telent.net/cliki/clg>.
You could also compile up your own version of the motifd daemon,
statically linked against the Motif lib of your choice, so that not
even Motif would be needed to be installed...
Regs, Pierre.
--
Pierre R. Mai <····@acm.org> http://www.pmsf.de/pmai/
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree,
is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals.
We cause accidents. -- Nathaniel Borenstein
From: Simo Melenius
Subject: Re: I need to know the best free Lisp for Linux
Date:
Message-ID: <mutd6yrdsau.fsf@alya.utu.fi>
···@firestorm.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> Well, I don't think any Linux systems tend to install any CL
> environments by default, so the situation's going to be a little
> different. I'm guessing you mean that, in addition to the lisp
> system, you don't want the user to have to install other libraries?
Yes, something like that. I could say even that as long as the user
doesn't have to start compiling anything and he gets the packages
without much hassle (read: preferably from his distribution), then
it's OK. I'm not sure how far-fetched dream that is, though.
A quick search in my Debian Woody packages does indeed comes up with
CMUCL + CLM but then again, it's Debian that is known for its very
extensive selection of packages.
> CLM is probably a good be for you -- I'm pretty sure LessTif or
> OpenMotif comes standard in most distributions. Also, there is a CL
> binding for gtk <http://ww.telent.net/cliki/clg>.
Interesting, I'll go look it up.
> Well, it's as available as you make it. Your application will need to
> install itself, right? It can check if Garnet is installed, and, if
True. It's just that you can't really get your own packages into a
commercial distribution like RedHat, and if they and a few other
distributions don't ship with CLM I'd need to start maintaining
3rd-party packages for several distributions just to get my program
running, and require the users to download and install extra rpms,
tgzs etc.
--
0110011001101111011011110110001001100001011100100010110101110000
Simo Melenius <······@utu.fi> writes:
> > Well, it's as available as you make it. Your application will need to
> > install itself, right? It can check if Garnet is installed, and, if
>
> True. It's just that you can't really get your own packages into a
> commercial distribution like RedHat, and if they and a few other
> distributions don't ship with CLM I'd need to start maintaining
> 3rd-party packages for several distributions just to get my program
> running, and require the users to download and install extra rpms,
> tgzs etc.
Right, but you're going to need to anyway. Only Debian, as far as I
know, ships with any common lisp libraries. I was assuming you meant
you didn't want to depend on any non-CL libraries that didn't come
with the distro. Not even Debian ships with clg, for example.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
"Thomas F. Burdick" schrieb:
> Simo Melenius <······@utu.fi> writes:
> > ···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> > This might be a good thread to ask a newbie question: is there any GUI
> > toolkit for CMUCL/CLISP that'd be a pretty much the de facto standard
> > for creating graphical user interfaces and displaying graphics on
> > unix-like systems? By de facto standard I mean something that I could
> > expect to find in the majority of Linux/Unix systems. I would be happy
> > to find something as common as Tcl/Tk for the Tcl language, which
> > usually installs by default on e.g. any Linux system.
> Well, I don't think any Linux systems tend to install any CL
> environments by default, so the situation's going to be a little
> different. ...
error.
Take SuSE 7.3 professional and install all (7cds takes about 5,4 gb or 3
hours). Do the rest install/configure as needed (i.e. kde). Create your
own user at install-time. Let the scripts working automatically. Start
the computer and login as the user you create (should run in graphical
mode). Open a shell or klick on the shell-icon in the menu bar. Type in:
clisp now you see what you know well. :)
The SuSE Package description says: clisp 25,2mb Common Lisp Interpreter
Version: 2.26-2001-05-23 (some docs included)
Well, I only can hope, the other distributors will follow.
stefan
lin8080 <·······@freenet.de> writes:
> "Thomas F. Burdick" schrieb:
> > Well, I don't think any Linux systems tend to install any CL
> > environments by default, so the situation's going to be a little
^^^^^^^
> > different. ...
>
> error.
>
> Take SuSE 7.3 professional and install all (7cds takes about 5,4 gb or 3
^^^
> hours).
"all" is not "default". That is what we were talking about. Debian
comes with clisp, cmucl, acl-installer, (and gcl), none of which are
installed by _default_.
--
-> -/- - Rahul Jain - -\- <-
-> -\- http://linux.rice.edu/~rahul -=- ············@techie.com -/- <-
-> -/- "I never could get the hang of Thursdays." - HHGTTG by DNA -\- <-
|--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
Version 11.423.999.221020101.23.50110101.042
(c)1996-2002, All rights reserved. Disclaimer available upon request.
Rahul Jain <·····@sid-1129.sid.rice.edu> writes:
> lin8080 <·······@freenet.de> writes:
>
> > "Thomas F. Burdick" schrieb:
>
> > > Well, I don't think any Linux systems tend to install any CL
> > > environments by default, so the situation's going to be a little
> ^^^^^^^
> > > different. ...
> >
> > error.
> >
> > Take SuSE 7.3 professional and install all (7cds takes about 5,4 gb or 3
> ^^^
> > hours).
>
> "all" is not "default". That is what we were talking about. Debian
> comes with clisp, cmucl, acl-installer, (and gcl), none of which are
> installed by _default_.
I don't even want to think about what would happen if Debian had an
"install all" option ;)
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@apocalypse.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> I don't even want to think about what would happen if Debian had an
> "install all" option ;)
Type '+' in dselect on the "All packages" header, after possibly
upgrading your RAM. Then look at the massive number of packages listed
on the conflict/dependency resolution screen. :)
--
-> -/- - Rahul Jain - -\- <-
-> -\- http://linux.rice.edu/~rahul -=- ············@techie.com -/- <-
-> -/- "I never could get the hang of Thursdays." - HHGTTG by DNA -\- <-
|--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
Version 11.423.999.221020101.23.50110101.042
(c)1996-2002, All rights reserved. Disclaimer available upon request.
Rahul Jain schrieb:
> lin8080 <·······@freenet.de> writes:
ok, all and default.
stefan
From: Brian P Templeton
Subject: Re: I need to know the best free Lisp for Linux
Date:
Message-ID: <87d6yrkli8.fsf@tunes.org>
Simo Melenius <······@utu.fi> writes:
> ···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
>
>> CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
> [...]
>> experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
>
> This might be a good thread to ask a newbie question: is there any GUI
> toolkit for CMUCL/CLISP that'd be a pretty much the de facto standard
> for creating graphical user interfaces and displaying graphics on
> unix-like systems?
CLIM (Common Lisp Interface Manager) is a standard UI system that is
portable between platforms and interaction methods, and has several
implementations.
> By de facto standard I mean something that I could
> expect to find in the majority of Linux/Unix systems. I would be happy
> to find something as common as Tcl/Tk for the Tcl language, which
> usually installs by default on e.g. any Linux system.
>
> I've been looking for one. CLX seems to be quite a broadly used but
> it's X11 lib and, thus, pretty lowlevel. Then, you have some Motif
> packages for at least CMUCL, but I'm not sure if it comes as a
> standard package in most of the distributions. I'd like to see my
> Common Lisp programs being easily runnable on different X11-based
> Unix/Linux platforms. Third, rep-gtk is snappy and GTK is really
> nice. However, rep-gtk is not Common Lisp but rather an emacsish lisp
> IIRC and not very complete package for general purpose programming,
> according to my experiences.
>
> If CLISP had GTK+ bindings, that'd be superb. I think the Scheme has a
> pretty complete GTK-binding (with Guile?) but I prefer Common Lisp
> over Scheme. I haven't found any, yet.
CLG? I'm not sure if it supports CLISP, though (it does support CMUCL,
but not SBCL :/).
> I also have the impression that
> CLisp + CLX + Garnet would be an extensive combination but I'm not
> sure if Garnet is easily available for many people.
>
> Any piece of knowledge welcome!
>
>
> best regards,
> Simo
>
> --
> 0110011001101111011011110110001001100001011100100010110101110000
hth,
--
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
From: synthespian
Subject: Re: I need to know the best free Lisp for Linux
Date:
Message-ID: <87adtt0zz0.fsf@uol.com.br>
···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> ············@bol.com.br (W Murat) writes:
>
> > Hello All!
> >
> >
> > I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it, more
> > I like it. Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials; but I need
> > to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my Linux box.
> > Anyone can help me? I will appreciate a lot!
>
> It depends on what you want to use it for, and what you mean by
> "free". There are free-of-charge personal-use slightly-crippled
> versions of the commercial Lisp systems (LispWorks and Allegro Common
> Lisp) -- but they come with nice development environments. The two
> best general-purpose Free-as-in-free-software lisps for Linux are
> CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
> portable to everything under the sun; it's usually fast enough, and
> has really really really fast bignum (large integer) support. Like,
> generally faster than anything else in any language (in my
> experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
> runs on a few architectures on Unix(-like OSes).
(C-k, C-k)
By the way, could you point out how difficult it would be to compile Lisp under linux with CMUCL?
What about CLISP?
Is the code compiled with CMUCL portable to any "Linux" (which is what I care about).?
Ca you comment on these issues a bit?
Thanks
henry
···········@uol.com.br
--------------------------------------------------------
_________ 1001101010 | _________ Blah, blah,
| ^ ^ | /1111100110 | | ^ ^ | /blah, blah.
| O O | / 0010100111 | | _ _ | /
| ^ |/ | | ^ |/
| ----- | | | --- |
\_______/ | \_______/
|
________________________________________________________
Micro$oft-Free Human 100% Debian GNU/Linux
KMFMS "Bring the genome to the people!"
synthespian <···········@uol.com.br> writes:
> ···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
>
> > ············@bol.com.br (W Murat) writes:
> >
> > > Hello All!
> > >
> > >
> > > I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it, more
> > > I like it. Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials; but I need
> > > to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my Linux box.
> > > Anyone can help me? I will appreciate a lot!
> >
> > It depends on what you want to use it for, and what you mean by
> > "free". There are free-of-charge personal-use slightly-crippled
> > versions of the commercial Lisp systems (LispWorks and Allegro Common
> > Lisp) -- but they come with nice development environments. The two
> > best general-purpose Free-as-in-free-software lisps for Linux are
> > CLISP and CMUCL. CLISP is a bytecode-interpreter system, and is
> > portable to everything under the sun; it's usually fast enough, and
> > has really really really fast bignum (large integer) support. Like,
> > generally faster than anything else in any language (in my
> > experience). CMUCL is a native-compiler, and a very good one; it only
> > runs on a few architectures on Unix(-like OSes).
> (C-k, C-k)
>
> By the way, could you point out how difficult it would be to compile
> Lisp under linux with CMUCL? What about CLISP?
Super easy. Learn CL and this'll be obvious.
> Is the code compiled with CMUCL portable to any "Linux" (which is
> what I care about).? Ca you comment on these issues a bit?
The generated code depends on a rather large runtime library (CMUCL),
and is specific to OS/architecture (as is true of compiled C code).
CMUCL only supports a few architectures (nowhere near as many as
Linux), so it can't compile code for any Linux port, just a few of the
most common.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
············@bol.com.br (W Murat) writes:
> I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it,
> more I like it.
Good to hear!
> Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials;
If you're not using it already, I recomment Successful Lisp:
http://psg.com/~dlamkins/sl/
> but I need to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my
> Linux box.
Well, it's good to want, but why would there be more than one compiler
if there was only one that was the "best"? All the compilers available
on Linux have a freely available version, at the least.
Open source compilers:
clisp - bytecode compiled, fast bignums
- http://clisp.sf.net
cmucl - fastest native code compiler (especially for floating point
code)
- http://cvs2.cons.org/cmucl/
sbcl - fork from cmucl to make it more "clean" and maintainable
- http://sbcl.sf.net
ecl - compiles to C and then uses the native C compiler
- http://ecls.sf.net
Commercial compilers (demo versions have session runtime and heap
limits):
allegro cl - expensive to get the full version, but comes with many
useful and difficult-to-reimplement features
- http://www.franz.com
lispworks - excellent IDE and many nice features
- http://www.xanalys.com
I don't think I've missed any major implementations (besides gcl, but
why use that when you can use ecl? (unless you want to use maxima)).
--
-> -/- - Rahul Jain - -\- <-
-> -\- http://linux.rice.edu/~rahul -=- ············@techie.com -/- <-
-> -/- "I never could get the hang of Thursdays." - HHGTTG by DNA -\- <-
|--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
Version 11.423.999.221020101.23.50110101.042
(c)1996-2002, All rights reserved. Disclaimer available upon request.
From: Dr. Edmund Weitz
Subject: Re: I need to know the best free Lisp for Linux
Date:
Message-ID: <m3u1s3x2x0.fsf@bird.agharta.de>
Rahul Jain <·····@sid-1129.sid.rice.edu> writes:
> ············@bol.com.br (W Murat) writes:
>
> > I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it,
> > more I like it.
>
> Good to hear!
>
> > Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials;
>
> If you're not using it already, I recomment Successful Lisp:
> http://psg.com/~dlamkins/sl/
>
> > but I need to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my
> > Linux box.
>
> Well, it's good to want, but why would there be more than one compiler
> if there was only one that was the "best"? All the compilers available
> on Linux have a freely available version, at the least.
>
> Open source compilers:
> clisp - bytecode compiled, fast bignums
> - http://clisp.sf.net
> cmucl - fastest native code compiler (especially for floating point
> code)
> - http://cvs2.cons.org/cmucl/
> sbcl - fork from cmucl to make it more "clean" and maintainable
> - http://sbcl.sf.net
> ecl - compiles to C and then uses the native C compiler
> - http://ecls.sf.net
>
> Commercial compilers (demo versions have session runtime and heap
> limits):
> allegro cl - expensive to get the full version, but comes with many
> useful and difficult-to-reimplement features
> - http://www.franz.com
> lispworks - excellent IDE and many nice features
> - http://www.xanalys.com
>
> I don't think I've missed any major implementations (besides gcl, but
> why use that when you can use ecl? (unless you want to use maxima)).
If Linux is not only limited to x86, there's also OpenMCL
<http://openmcl.clozure.com/>.
Edi.
--
Dr. Edmund Weitz
Hamburg
Germany
The Common Lisp Cookbook
<http://cl-cookbook.sourceforge.net/>
············@bol.com.br (W Murat) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
> I just started my way trying to learn Lisp. More I read about it, more
> I like it. Right now, I'm reading some on-line tutorials; but I need
> to know what the best free Lisp compiler I can get to my Linux box.
> Anyone can help me? I will appreciate a lot!
I didn't see anyone explicitly mention librep (http://librep.sf.net/).
It works fine for my purposes and comes with Red Hat and Mandrake
Linux distributions as the "librep" rpm package. Rep stands for "Read,
Eval, Print".
Someone mentioned rep-gtk in this thread, which is just librep's gtk
binding (http://rep-gtk.sf.net).