Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez ha scritto:
> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
xlisp-stat
--
Se hai un problema che deve essere risolto da una burocrazia,ti conviene
cambiare problema.
Legge di Good
Giacomo <··················@tin.it> wrote in message news:<······························@tin.it>...
> Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez ha scritto:
>
> > Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
>
> xlisp-stat
I realize you recently asked an xlisp-stat question, and so you are
polling the newsgroup for the appearance of answers. Of course you
think xlisp-stat is good, because you are using it.
But you might not be aware that Xlisp and its derivatives are
implementations of their own dialect of Lisp, not ANSI Common Lisp.
Ramiro is a Lisp newbie and probably doesn't know about all these
dialects and how, if at all, they relate to the standard Lisp
language, if there is one. Newbies like Ramiro should be steered
toward information about Common Lisp, rather than obscure,
implementation-specific dialects.
Incidentally, most Common Lisp implementations have compilers. In
fact, some don't even have interpreters. Everything that is evaluated
is compiled first. Ramiro may be laboring under the common
misconception that Lisp is an interpreted-only language.
Giacomo <··················@tin.it> writes:
> Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez ha scritto:
>
>> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
>
> xlisp-stat
no. xlisp is an old, not actively developed, dialect of scheme with
some object oriented extensions. Please start to learn lisp with a
Common Lisp, if you wont to do statistical computing then look into
xlisp-stat, until then try one of:
sbcl - sbcl.sf.net
cmucl - www.cons.org/cmucl
clisp - clisp.sf.net
if you're on ppc-linux then you could also try openmcl
(openmcl.clozure.com).
--
-Marco
Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
That's how the light gets in.
-Leonard Cohen
Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:51:03 +0100, Marco Baringer ha scritto:
> Giacomo <··················@tin.it> writes:
>
>> Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez ha scritto:
>>
>>> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
>>
>> xlisp-stat
>
> no. xlisp is an old, not actively developed, dialect of scheme with
[...]
Ops! Sorry
--
Se hai un problema che deve essere risolto da una burocrazia,ti conviene
cambiare problema.
Legge di Good
Oops! Marco Baringer <··@bese.it> was seen spray-painting on a wall:
> Giacomo <··················@tin.it> writes:
>
>> Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez ha scritto:
>>
>>> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
>>
>> xlisp-stat
>
> no. xlisp is an old, not actively developed, dialect of scheme with
> some object oriented extensions. Please start to learn lisp with a
> Common Lisp, if you wont to do statistical computing then look into
> xlisp-stat, until then try one of:
>
> sbcl - sbcl.sf.net
>
> cmucl - www.cons.org/cmucl
>
> clisp - clisp.sf.net
But the O.P. requested an _interpreter_.
Those are all Lisp _compilers_, and therefore do not satisfy the
request.
rep is another Lisp interpreter. There are probably some of the
Scheme implementations that are interpreted, too.
--
If this was helpful, <http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne> rate me
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/lisp.html
"Of course, to join the NSA, all you really have to do is pick up any
phone, anywhere, make a long-distance call, and say `National Security
Agency, I'd like a job.' They'll check you out and either give you a
job, or do a job on you." -- David Palmer
Christopher Browne <········@acm.org> writes:
> Oops! Marco Baringer <··@bese.it> was seen spray-painting on a wall:
> > Giacomo <··················@tin.it> writes:
> >
> >> Il Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez ha scritto:
> >>
> >>> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
[...]
> But the O.P. requested an _interpreter_.
"Hello I am new to lisp". This wasn't an educated request. When
someone identifies themselves as a newbie, you do them a great
disservice to take their questions too literally.
> Those are all Lisp _compilers_, and therefore do not satisfy the
> request.
So what? Presumably the OP is looking for a "lisp system" not a "lisp
interpreter," but being new to lisp, doesn't know the terminology yet.
> rep is another Lisp interpreter.
And a really bad place to point a newbie to!
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
Hi Christopher Browne,
>> no. xlisp is an old, not actively developed, dialect of scheme with
>> some object oriented extensions. Please start to learn lisp with a
>> Common Lisp, if you wont to do statistical computing then look into
>> xlisp-stat, until then try one of:
>>
>> sbcl - sbcl.sf.net
>>
>> cmucl - www.cons.org/cmucl
>>
>> clisp - clisp.sf.net
>
> But the O.P. requested an _interpreter_.
>
> Those are all Lisp _compilers_, and therefore do not satisfy the
> request.
CLISP will run both interpreted and byte-compiled code.
CMUCL will run interpreted, byte-compiled and assembly code.
SBCL is the only non-interpreter out of these three as it always compiles
forms to assembly code before evaluating them.
It's important for some types of development that CMUCL be recognised as
having an interpreter and byte compiler (speed/size tradeoffs). And when
developing "incrementally" I have reloaded source code and tested it
interpreted in CMUCL within 0.4s. That's fast enough to not interrupt my
work. The same code took 14s to load in SBCL (which would have rendered
the method of development unproductive. There would have been options to
increase my productivity with SBCL. For example I could have switched to
an image/selective compilation approach instead of simply reloading a
source file. Nonetheless I find the absence of an interpreter significant).
I have always appreciated your superb website Christopher.
Regards,
Adam
Ramiro Rodriguez wrote:
> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
Others have provided links to CL /compilers/. I just wanted to point out
that CL is a compiled language, natively so other than for CLisp. CLisp
is not the most ANSI-compliant implementation either, but it does run
everywhere and some people like it.
kt
--
http://tilton-technology.com
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:32:25 GMT, Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Others have provided links to CL /compilers/. I just wanted to point
> out that CL is a compiled language, natively so other than for
> CLisp. CLisp is not the most ANSI-compliant implementation either,
> but it does run everywhere and some people like it.
To clarify a bit more because this might not be readily apparent to a
newbie:
"CL" is short for "Common Lisp" which is a standardized (by ANSI)
language like, say, C. There are several implementations of this
language out there (see other messages in this thread). The "CLisp"
Kenny refers to is one of these implementations, actually called
"CLISP", which compiles to bytecode (like Java) while almost all other
Common Lisp implementations nowadays compile to machine code.
HTH,
Edi.
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 15:41:00 +0100, Edi Weitz ("Edi") writes:
Edi> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:32:25 GMT, Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Others have provided links to CL /compilers/. I just wanted to point
>> out that CL is a compiled language, natively so other than for
>> CLisp. CLisp is not the most ANSI-compliant implementation either,
>> but it does run everywhere and some people like it.
Edi> To clarify a bit more because this might not be readily apparent to a
Edi> newbie:
Edi> "CL" is short for "Common Lisp" which is a standardized (by ANSI)
Edi> language like, say, C. There are several implementations of this
Edi> language out there (see other messages in this thread). The "CLisp"
Edi> Kenny refers to is one of these implementations, actually called
Edi> "CLISP", which compiles to bytecode (like Java) while almost all other
Edi> Common Lisp implementations nowadays compile to machine code.
People have their favorites (mine is the "Lispworks" product from Xanalys)
but I thought I should mention that CLISP, while byte-compiled, is being
used for some fairly hefty commercial applications. I am not sure how far
along CLISP is with ANSI compliance, but it's not just a toy or something.
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:30:43 GMT, ······@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) wrote:
> People have their favorites (mine is the "Lispworks" product from
> Xanalys) but I thought I should mention that CLISP, while
> byte-compiled, is being used for some fairly hefty commercial
> applications. I am not sure how far along CLISP is with ANSI
> compliance, but it's not just a toy or something.
Sure, and I didn't mean to imply anything else. That's why I hinted at
Java which most people don't think of as a toy either.
AFAIK the ANSI issues with CLISP are mostly in the "advanced CLOS"
area and shouldn't be seen as a reason not to use CLISP for learning
CL.
Edi.
Ramiro Rodriguez wrote:
> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
http://alu.cliki.net/Implementation lists them all. ;)
Pascal
--
Pascal Costanza University of Bonn
···············@web.de Institute of Computer Science III
http://www.pascalcostanza.de R�merstr. 164, D-53117 Bonn (Germany)
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 08:31:18 -0500, Ramiro Rodriguez <··········@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
Actually, you're looking for a compiler, not an interpreter.
Edi.
Ramiro Rodriguez <··········@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
CLisp. Is available with at least Debian, SuSE, Gentoo as part of
the normal distribution and, I'm sure, on some more distributions.
Has the advantage that it works nicely for CGI scripts *g*
Regards,
Alex.
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
Hi all.
>>Hello I am new to lisp, what is a good lisp interpreter for linux?
I'm newbie too (and I'm trying CLISP & CMUCL), don't take me too serious.
I think scheme48 is a nice lisp interpreter ;| (and other schemes too).
(littleofftopic: is STALIN alive?)
>
> CLisp. Is available with at least Debian, SuSE, Gentoo as part of
> the normal distribution and, I'm sure, on some more distributions.
& slackware 9.1
> Has the advantage [.....]
It's (CLISP) very responsible. But no slime on clisp :(
> [.....]
regards, szymon.
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 10:05:34 +0100, xur wrote:
> (littleofftopic: is STALIN alive?)
No. He died back in 1953.
Bah da boom!
Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week! Bring the kids and dog.
On a more serious note, Stalin is still out there. I don't think that
it's still under active development. You can contact Dr. Jeffery Siskind,
its developer, at Purdue University: http://www.ece.purdue.edu/~qobi/ to
find out what its current status is. Or, you could ask on
comp.lang.scheme, which is a more appropriate group.
faa
"Frank A. Adrian" <·······@ancar.org> writes:
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 10:05:34 +0100, xur wrote:
>
>> (littleofftopic: is STALIN alive?)
>
> No. He died back in 1953.
>
> Bah da boom!
> Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week! Bring the kids and dog.
>
> On a more serious note, Stalin is still out there. I don't think that
> it's still under active development. You can contact Dr. Jeffery Siskind,
> its developer, at Purdue University: http://www.ece.purdue.edu/~qobi/ to
> find out what its current status is. Or, you could ask on
> comp.lang.scheme, which is a more appropriate group.
It is still being actively maintained and used.
--
~jrm
> You must be running a _days_ old copy of SLIME. Get with it, man!
>
> ;-)
thanks, I waste some time (I don't know about -K option in CLISP), but now I
can delete ILISP :)
regards, szymon.
szymon <···@wp.pl> writes:
> thanks, I waste some time (I don't know about -K option in CLISP),
> but now I can delete ILISP
I had the same problem. Unless I told SLIME to us "clisp -K full" as
its Lisp program invocation, the dependency on the CLISP REGEXP
module failed. Once I figured that out, SLIME worked.
I found that it doesn't add too much /for CLISP/ that ILISP doesn't
already provide. For example, even though the debugger can
(generically) highlight the current frame in the source code, that
feature is not implemented for CLISP. It may be the case that CLISP
does not expose enough information to enable SLIME to perform this
feature.
--
Steven E. Harris :: ········@raytheon.com
Raytheon :: http://www.raytheon.com
"Steven E. Harris" <········@raytheon.com> writes:
> Unless I told SLIME to us "clisp -K full" as its Lisp program
> invocation, the dependency on the CLISP REGEXP module failed. Once I
> figured that out, SLIME worked.
I've just created a Cliki page at http://www.cliki.net/SLIME%20Tips
where tips like this can be posted, both to warn other users and to
publicise bugs that need fixing. Please post a note if you have time!
> I found that it doesn't add too much /for CLISP/ that ILISP doesn't
> already provide. For example, even though the debugger can
> (generically) highlight the current frame in the source code, that
> feature is not implemented for CLISP. It may be the case that CLISP
> does not expose enough information to enable SLIME to perform this
> feature.
That might be it, but also the CLISP backend is the newest one
(committed one week ago), so quite likely there just hasn't been time
to hack in a lot of the features.
General note: we're still hacking wildly and the code ain't stable,
but thrill-seekers note that nowadays we're running on Unix, OSX, and
Windows with backends for CMUCL, SBCL, OpenMCL, LispWorks, ACL, and
CLISP. Emacs-crashes have never been more accessible!
Cheers,
Luke
Luke Gorrie <····@bluetail.com> writes:
> I've just created a Cliki page at http://www.cliki.net/SLIME%20Tips
> where tips like this can be posted, both to warn other users and to
> publicise bugs that need fixing. Please post a note if you have
> time!
Done.
> That might be it, but also the CLISP backend is the newest one
> (committed one week ago), so quite likely there just hasn't been
> time to hack in a lot of the features.
I look forward to improvements as they arrive. In the meantime, SLIME
provides an incentive to try another Lisp implementation just to see
some of its fully-implemented features in action.
--
Steven E. Harris
Clisp is what i reccomend.
Free and follows the standard.
Supposedly one of the faster ones, but i really haven't done testing myself.
GCL looks good, but not yet up to standard...
But any lisp combined with emacs and ilisp should work, as long as it complies to the second standard.
"Dragontamer" <··@dragontamer.is-a-geek.com> writes:
> Clisp is what i reccomend.
> Free and follows the standard.
No, it screws up the object system pretty badly. (Read up on
user-defined method combinations, which CLISP doesn't implement).
> Supposedly one of the faster ones, but i really haven't done testing myself.
Uh, no it's one of the slowest. It's fast enough for most uses, but
it's based around a bytecode interpreter. This is why it's portable
to everything under the sun, though.
Maybe you're thinking of CMUCL ;-)
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'