From: John Stoneham
Subject: porting to CormanLisp
Date: 
Message-ID: <sLOyb.3435$6E4.1526@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com>
I realize this may sound like I'm trying to wimp out by asking instead 
of just trying it myself, and I'm also exposing my vast inexperience 
with all the various implementations, but which linux CL is most 
portable to CormanLisp? Ok, maybe that was worded poorly, I'm not 
talking about porting the implementation itself, just code written for it.

I plan on doing most of my development on linux and then distributing to 
some "patients" (as I refer to them) who have only Windows, and for 
various reasons Allegro is out of the question. The project won't be 
making heavy use of CLOS, so maybe that helps. But I would hate to start 
on this project with, say, CMUCL and then discover that a large portion 
of the code needs to be tweaked or rewritten to compile under CormanLisp.

Any suggestions?

From: Henrik Motakef
Subject: Re: porting to CormanLisp
Date: 
Message-ID: <86fzg4yz4x.fsf@pokey.internal.henrik-motakef.de>
John Stoneham <·········@yahoo.com> writes:

> I realize this may sound like I'm trying to wimp out by asking instead
> of just trying it myself, and I'm also exposing my vast inexperience
> with all the various implementations, but which linux CL is most
> portable to CormanLisp? Ok, maybe that was worded poorly, I'm not
> talking about porting the implementation itself, just code written for
> it.

I don't think it matters much which Unix Lisp you use if you plan to
port to Corman afterwards. Just try to stay close to the standard.

> I plan on doing most of my development on linux and then distributing
> to some "patients" (as I refer to them) who have only Windows, and for
> various reasons Allegro is out of the question. The project won't be
> making heavy use of CLOS, so maybe that helps. But I would hate to
> start on this project with, say, CMUCL and then discover that a large
> portion of the code needs to be tweaked or rewritten to compile under
> CormanLisp.
>
> Any suggestions?

How about using a Lisp that works on Unix /and/ Windows, like CLISP?
If you don't use fancy CLOS/MOP stuff it should work quite well, and
porting will certainly be easier. It doesn't do native compilation,
however, but it is fast enough for many uses.
From: Arthur Lemmens
Subject: Re: porting to CormanLisp
Date: 
Message-ID: <oprziwnsj7k6vmsw@news.xs4all.nl>
John Stoneham <·········@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I plan on doing most of my development on linux and then distributing
> to some "patients" (as I refer to them) who have only Windows, and
> for various reasons Allegro is out of the question.

You could also consider Lispworks. It has implementations for both
Lispworks and Windows. Pricewise it's somewhere between CormanLisp
and Allegro.

Arthur Lemmens