I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap. It's not the
most practical computer I've ever had my hand on, but at $0 I wasn't
going to say no, given how much I enjoyed using them 8 years ago when
I had a friend who was all NeXT all the time. It'll be a cool public
terminal to have in the living room for friends -- and I know Steve
Jobs still uses his, so I'm confident I can integrate it with a Mac
household. Web browser, word processor, spreadsheet, paint program,
Objective-C IDE, I've got all of those, but ...
Anyone know what Lisp systems ran on NeXT? Given the era they're
from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've seen
from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro 3 that
ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of AKCL/GCL. I'd
be interested to hear from anyone who actually used Lisp on one of
these -- if I'm going to have it in my living room, I want to have the
appropriate Lisp on it :-)
(If you used any Lisp, Common or otherwise, I'd be interested to hear
about it).
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) wrote in message news:<···············@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU>...
> I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap.
--->8--- snipped --->8---
Only very casually on-topic I'm afraid (as in it is related to
NeXT 8-), but has anybody noticed how similar the NeXT windowing
classes (and now OS X NS* classes) and CLIM are? For example:
Windows contain views.
Views can contain nested views.
Each view can have its own coordinate system.
Coordinate systems can be arbitrarily rotated and scaled through
affine transformations.
Coordinate systems can be converted to those of other views (i.e.
convert coords of view into the coords of its parent, or the screen).
Each "widget" (e.g. a button) is actually a view in its own right.
Specific view types are used to organise their children in different
ways.
Views can be ordered in the view hierarchy arbitrarily, and depending
on the ordering the display is changed (child views occlude parent
views).
There's other stuff too, but that's off the top of my head. Maybe
that should be NeXT vs. Silica since many of the windowing definitions
in CLIM describe Silica AFAIK.
I'd be interested to know which direction the flow went (Lisp -> NeXT,
vice versa, or maybe they were intertwined - or maybe its all a coincidence
and this is just the "best" way to define 2D windowing relationships).
Certainly a few of the ideas listed above just seem logical results of
other, more fundamental, ideas also in the list.
I find it hard to believe in coincidence however 8-)
-Duncan
Duncan Rose wrote:
>
> ···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) wrote in message news:<···············@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU>...
> > I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap.
>
> --->8--- snipped --->8---
>
> Only very casually on-topic I'm afraid (as in it is related to
> NeXT 8-), but has anybody noticed how similar the NeXT windowing
> classes (and now OS X NS* classes) and CLIM are? For example:
>
> Windows contain views.
> Views can contain nested views.
> Each view can have its own coordinate system.
> Coordinate systems can be arbitrarily rotated and scaled through
> affine transformations.
> Coordinate systems can be converted to those of other views (i.e.
> convert coords of view into the coords of its parent, or the screen).
> Each "widget" (e.g. a button) is actually a view in its own right.
> Specific view types are used to organise their children in different
> ways.
> Views can be ordered in the view hierarchy arbitrarily, and depending
> on the ordering the display is changed (child views occlude parent
> views).
Well all the GUIs I have built atop Cells had almost all those features.
No rotation until I made OpenGL the basis of my GUI (and it became
trivial to do) -- well, ok, things like rotation and the Z-axis are yet
first-class geometry citizens, but it is just a matter of time. And the
tree structure defines the occlusion, so one sibling cannot occlude any
following sibling, and the parent cannot occlude a child. The parent
/can/ clip output so know child can draw outside the parent's bounds.
But my GUIs are driven by requirements as I actually build real
applications, and I have not yet run into a need for more flexibility in
those regards.
Otherwise, it sounds like you are describing Cello (and ModelGraphics
before it and whatever I called it on the Mac).
>
> There's other stuff too, but that's off the top of my head. Maybe
> that should be NeXT vs. Silica since many of the windowing definitions
> in CLIM describe Silica AFAIK.
>
> I'd be interested to know which direction the flow went (Lisp -> NeXT,
> vice versa, or maybe they were intertwined - or maybe its all a coincidence
> and this is just the "best" way to define 2D windowing relationships).
> Certainly a few of the ideas listed above just seem logical results of
> other, more fundamental, ideas also in the list.
>
> I find it hard to believe in coincidence however 8-)
>
Well, I have never seen a Next box and did not look much at CLIM until
the past few weeks, so if coincidence is out that leaves us with aliens
spreading their technology on Earth to give us a leg up.
:)
Kenny <eeep-squark-zzzzzzozt>
--
http://www.tilton-technology.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------
"[If anyone really has healing powers,] I would like to call
them about my knees."
-- Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message news:<·················@nyc.rr.com>...
> Duncan Rose wrote:
> >
> > ···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) wrote in message news:<···············@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU>...
> > > I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap.
> >
> > --->8--- snipped --->8---
> >
> > Only very casually on-topic I'm afraid (as in it is related to
> > NeXT 8-), but has anybody noticed how similar the NeXT windowing
> > classes (and now OS X NS* classes) and CLIM are? For example:
> >
> > Windows contain views.
> > Views can contain nested views.
> > Each view can have its own coordinate system.
> > Coordinate systems can be arbitrarily rotated and scaled through
> > affine transformations.
> > Coordinate systems can be converted to those of other views (i.e.
> > convert coords of view into the coords of its parent, or the screen).
> > Each "widget" (e.g. a button) is actually a view in its own right.
> > Specific view types are used to organise their children in different
> > ways.
> > Views can be ordered in the view hierarchy arbitrarily, and depending
> > on the ordering the display is changed (child views occlude parent
> > views).
>
> Well all the GUIs I have built atop Cells had almost all those features.
> No rotation until I made OpenGL the basis of my GUI (and it became
> trivial to do) -- well, ok, things like rotation and the Z-axis are yet
> first-class geometry citizens, but it is just a matter of time. And the
> tree structure defines the occlusion, so one sibling cannot occlude any
> following sibling, and the parent cannot occlude a child. The parent
> /can/ clip output so know child can draw outside the parent's bounds.
> But my GUIs are driven by requirements as I actually build real
> applications, and I have not yet run into a need for more flexibility in
> those regards.
>
> Otherwise, it sounds like you are describing Cello (and ModelGraphics
> before it and whatever I called it on the Mac).
>
The Z-axis is also ignored in CLIM / OSX Cocoa. We're talking purely 2D here.
All the systems I've used also enabled this functionality too (though I
must confess at this point that I only have real experience of the Java
windowing systems, AWT + Swing though I have dabbled in both X + Windows
GUI experimentation). The thing that struck me about CLIM / OSX Cocoa was
not that they enabled the functionality, it was that the way they chose
to enable it was a very close fit.
I we may be talking across each other with respect to sheet occlusion.
There is nothing in CLIM or in OSX as far as I am aware that prevents
"siblings" from occluding each other (other than this being made so by
the layout panes). Parents occluding children
doesn't happen (that's why both systems permit reordering of the sheet
hierarchy to allow raising and burying of areas containing in a window or
frame), but this is probably the most obvious commonality in all windowing
systems.
An obvious place that the "object" hierarchies overlap in CLIM / Cocoa in
what may not be such a predeterministic manner would for me be in the
respective layout facilities.
In "popular" OO design (now I'm talking C++/Java type OO,
apologies) it seems reasonable to say "A window ISA screen area, and HASA
layout". Both CLIM + Cocoa don't however do this, unlike every other layout-
oriented windowing system I've looked at. They both say that a layout ISA
screen area in this context. In Java at least there's no way you could say
a layout is related to a Button or a Panel through its ancestry. Java Layouts
don't inherit from Component or Container. It's been a while since I looked,
but I'm pretty sure GTK does it a similar way to Java (and I'm extrapolating
in a manner that I know may well be wrong, but since both GTK + Java are
sort-of from the X stable, I'm assuming for now (i.e. until I look it up
because this thread continues 8-) that X is similar too).
[aside: I *know* I should really go and look this stuff up since there's a
high liklihood here I'm about to show myself up 8-) ]
Now, I'm not saying the Cocoa / CLIM way is better or worse than any other, I
just found it interesting that they were so similar. Are you saying that
Cello is likewise a good fit with these, not in the functionality that it
enables, but in the internal objects it uses to enable that functionality?
It was this specifically that I was suprised about.
> >
> > There's other stuff too, but that's off the top of my head. Maybe
> > that should be NeXT vs. Silica since many of the windowing definitions
> > in CLIM describe Silica AFAIK.
> >
> > I'd be interested to know which direction the flow went (Lisp -> NeXT,
> > vice versa, or maybe they were intertwined - or maybe its all a coincidence
> > and this is just the "best" way to define 2D windowing relationships).
> > Certainly a few of the ideas listed above just seem logical results of
> > other, more fundamental, ideas also in the list.
> >
> > I find it hard to believe in coincidence however 8-)
> >
>
> Well, I have never seen a Next box and did not look much at CLIM until
> the past few weeks, so if coincidence is out that leaves us with aliens
> spreading their technology on Earth to give us a leg up.
>
How does what has been said above rule out cross-pollenation between the
NeXT + CLIM teams?
Until you say the windowing substrate in Cello is structurally the same as
that in CLIM and NeXT (and the NS in the Cocoa NSView, NSWindow etc. classes
stands for NextStep, so I think the NeXT + Cocoa windowing substrates
are if not identical than very, very similar) I still won't believe
in this as a coincidence 8-)
I'll add a cover-my-ass comment here - I didn't mean to say originally that
I don't believe in coincidence at all (because I certainly do). But I don't
believe in this specific case that coincidence is the cause. I'm ready to be
wrong though!
-Duncan
> :)
>
> Kenny <eeep-squark-zzzzzzozt>
Duncan Rose wrote:
> I'll add a cover-my-ass comment here - I didn't mean to say originally that
> I don't believe in coincidence at all (because I certainly do). But I don't
> believe in this specific case that coincidence is the cause.
I'll CMA too and say it sounds like you are talking about some striking
similarities and are very likely right about the x-pollenation. I was
just making a general bullsh*t remark about separate and independent
discoveries.
A good example might be Cells, which look frighteningly like KR rules,
right down to the syntax, and were developed using MCL, which came with
Garnet/KR as a contrib. ie, unbeknownst to me, the source for the hack I
was inventing from scratch was sitting on my hard drive in a subfolder
of the language implementation I was using!
But again, I am just shooting the breeze, so I'll shut up and let
someone who Actually Knows have a shot at the microphone.
kenny
--
http://www.tilton-technology.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------
"[If anyone really has healing powers,] I would like to call
them about my knees."
-- Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Duncan Rose wrote:
> > I'll add a cover-my-ass comment here - I didn't mean to say originally that
> > I don't believe in coincidence at all (because I certainly do). But I don't
> > believe in this specific case that coincidence is the cause.
>
> I'll CMA too and say it sounds like you are talking about some striking
> similarities and are very likely right about the x-pollenation. I was
> just making a general bullsh*t remark about separate and independent
> discoveries.
I'll chime in here with nothing useful: it wouldn't surprise me either
way. Once you have a framework like the NeXT Objective-C one, a lot
of the decisions they made would fall out of it as the obvious way to
do things. But then again, NeXT was a Steve Jobs company, who had
already spent the early 80's raiding Smalltalk for good ideas, so
given the era, I'd expect that he was raiding Lisp for good ideas.
Huh, now you got me curious...
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
> > Duncan Rose wrote:
> > > I'll add a cover-my-ass comment here - I didn't mean to say
> > > originally that I don't believe in coincidence at all (because I
> > > certainly do). But I don't believe in this specific case that
> > > coincidence is the cause.
> >
> > I'll CMA too and say it sounds like you are talking about some striking
> > similarities and are very likely right about the x-pollenation. I was
> > just making a general bullsh*t remark about separate and independent
> > discoveries.
>
> I'll chime in here with nothing useful: it wouldn't surprise me either
> way. Once you have a framework like the NeXT Objective-C one, a lot
> of the decisions they made would fall out of it as the obvious way to
> do things. But then again, NeXT was a Steve Jobs company, who had
> already spent the early 80's raiding Smalltalk for good ideas, so
> given the era, I'd expect that he was raiding Lisp for good ideas.
>
> Huh, now you got me curious...
Indeed, a big part of NeXTSTEP success comes from Interface Builder
which was originally created in Lisp for Macintosh (named SOS
Interface) by Jean-Marie Hullot, searcher at the INRIA. When it was
shown to Steve Jobs at NeXT's, in 1987, he saw the potential and hired
Hullot to port his program to Objective-C. But clearly, it's a Lisp
application in disguise.
http://www.levenez.com/NeXTSTEP/Historique.html
http://www.levenez.com/NeXTSTEP/Personnes.html#Hullot
--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein
http://www.theadvocates.org/
Thomas F. Burdick wrote:
> Anyone know what Lisp systems ran on NeXT? Given the era they're
> from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've seen
> from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro 3 that
> ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of AKCL/GCL. I'd
> be interested to hear from anyone who actually used Lisp on one of
> these -- if I'm going to have it in my living room, I want to have the
> appropriate Lisp on it :-)
EcoLisp used to run on it. At least, from many #ifdefs of the original sources
and I think from an old list of supported platforms. It should not be too
difficult to port the current version of ECL.
Juanjo
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've seen
> from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro 3 that
> ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of AKCL/GCL.
The original cubes actually came bundled with allegro!
--
(espen)
The NeXT came with Allegro bundled (if memory does not fail me)
marco
Thomas F. Burdick wrote:
> I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap. It's not the
> most practical computer I've ever had my hand on, but at $0 I wasn't
> going to say no, given how much I enjoyed using them 8 years ago when
> I had a friend who was all NeXT all the time. It'll be a cool public
> terminal to have in the living room for friends -- and I know Steve
> Jobs still uses his, so I'm confident I can integrate it with a Mac
> household. Web browser, word processor, spreadsheet, paint program,
> Objective-C IDE, I've got all of those, but ...
>
> Anyone know what Lisp systems ran on NeXT? Given the era they're
> from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've seen
> from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro 3 that
> ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of AKCL/GCL. I'd
> be interested to hear from anyone who actually used Lisp on one of
> these -- if I'm going to have it in my living room, I want to have the
> appropriate Lisp on it :-)
>
> (If you used any Lisp, Common or otherwise, I'd be interested to hear
> about it).
>
In article <···················@typhoon.nyu.edu>, Marco Antoniotti
<·······@cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
> The NeXT came with Allegro bundled (if memory does not fail me)
>
> marco
Much of the software that was originally bundled with the first Cube
was not included on later machines, so chances are you don't have
Allegro, Mathematica, or any of the other cool toys.
--
Brian Mastenbrook
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~bmastenb/
On 28 Jan 2004 20:54:13 -0800, ···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) wrote:
> I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap. It's not the
> most practical computer I've ever had my hand on, but at $0 I wasn't
> going to say no, given how much I enjoyed using them 8 years ago
> when I had a friend who was all NeXT all the time. It'll be a cool
> public terminal to have in the living room for friends -- and I know
> Steve Jobs still uses his, so I'm confident I can integrate it with
> a Mac household. Web browser, word processor, spreadsheet, paint
> program, Objective-C IDE, I've got all of those, but ...
>
> Anyone know what Lisp systems ran on NeXT? Given the era they're
> from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've
> seen from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro
> 3 that ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of
> AKCL/GCL. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who actually used
> Lisp on one of these -- if I'm going to have it in my living room, I
> want to have the appropriate Lisp on it :-)
Have you tried to just ask Franz? I guess they still have copies of
AllegroCL for NeXT lying around and would be willing to give them to
you for a small fee if any. Maybe not, but asking them won't
hurt... :)
Edi.
Edi Weitz wrote:
> Have you tried to just ask Franz? I guess they still have copies of
> AllegroCL for NeXT lying around and would be willing to give them to
> you for a small fee if any. Maybe not, but asking them won't
> hurt... :)
I'm answering very unofficially, but I suspect Franz doesn't still have
copies lying around. I know we don't have any NeXT boxes remaining and
so wouldn't have the ability to rebuild from sources, and I'm not even
sure we still have the sources. I think it has been more than a decade
since the platform was officially dropped.
It's too bad. While (as someone else has pointed out) it might not be
too difficult to build some current open-source Common Lisp on an old
NeXT box, there was a lot of work in the Allegro implementation
interfacing to Objective C -- it was possible to do all sorts of close
interface with Objective C, even doing introspection and defining and
redefining classes and methods from Lisp. It made interface to the NeXT
GUI from CL quite practical. The language coupling was far more
powerful than what can be done, for instance, with C++.
"Steven M. Haflich" <·················@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> Edi Weitz wrote:
>
> > Have you tried to just ask Franz? I guess they still have copies of
> > AllegroCL for NeXT lying around and would be willing to give them to
> > you for a small fee if any. Maybe not, but asking them won't
> > hurt... :)
>
> I'm answering very unofficially, but I suspect Franz doesn't still have
> copies lying around. I know we don't have any NeXT boxes remaining and
> so wouldn't have the ability to rebuild from sources, and I'm not even
> sure we still have the sources. I think it has been more than a decade
> since the platform was officially dropped.
Shoot. I was planning on trying to get the NeXT set up after I move,
and was hoping to track down a copy of Allegro. I'm still going to
try, but that doesn't sound encouraging...
> It's too bad. While (as someone else has pointed out) it might not be
> too difficult to build some current open-source Common Lisp on an old
> NeXT box, there was a lot of work in the Allegro implementation
> interfacing to Objective C -- it was possible to do all sorts of close
> interface with Objective C, even doing introspection and defining and
> redefining classes and methods from Lisp. It made interface to the NeXT
> GUI from CL quite practical. The language coupling was far more
> powerful than what can be done, for instance, with C++.
Dang -- this sounds great. It also sounds like something that would
be nice to have on the Mac :-)
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
On 2004-02-02 10:29:50 -0800, ···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F.
Burdick) said:
> "Steven M. Haflich" <·················@alum.mit.edu> writes:
>
> > Edi Weitz wrote:
> >
> > > Have you tried to just ask Franz? I guess they still have copies of
> > > AllegroCL for NeXT lying around and would be willing to give them to
> > > you for a small fee if any. Maybe not, but asking them won't
> > > hurt... :)
> >
> > I'm answering very unofficially, but I suspect Franz doesn't still have
> > copies lying around. I know we don't have any NeXT boxes remaining and
> > so wouldn't have the ability to rebuild from sources, and I'm not even
> > sure we still have the sources. I think it has been more than a decade
> > since the platform was officially dropped.
>
> Shoot. I was planning on trying to get the NeXT set up after I move,
> and was hoping to track down a copy of Allegro. I'm still going to
> try, but that doesn't sound encouraging...
>
> > It's too bad. While (as someone else has pointed out) it might not be
> > too difficult to build some current open-source Common Lisp on an old
> > NeXT box, there was a lot of work in the Allegro implementation
> > interfacing to Objective C -- it was possible to do all sorts of close
> > interface with Objective C, even doing introspection and defining and
> > redefining classes and methods from Lisp. It made interface to the
NeXT
> > GUI from CL quite practical. The language coupling was far more
> > powerful than what can be done, for instance, with C++.
>
> Dang -- this sounds great. It also sounds like something that would
> be nice to have on the Mac :-)
You can do it with openmcl. The Objective C bridge is quite serviceable in
versions 0.13 and 0.14, and Gary Byers and Randall Beer are working on
making it better (basically they're working on making Objective C classes
and objects look just like CLOS classes and objects).
"Steven M. Haflich" <·················@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> Edi Weitz wrote:
>
> > Have you tried to just ask Franz? I guess they still have copies of
> > AllegroCL for NeXT lying around and would be willing to give them to
> > you for a small fee if any. Maybe not, but asking them won't
> > hurt... :)
>
> I'm answering very unofficially, but I suspect Franz doesn't still have
> copies lying around. I know we don't have any NeXT boxes remaining and
> so wouldn't have the ability to rebuild from sources, and I'm not even
> sure we still have the sources. I think it has been more than a decade
> since the platform was officially dropped.
>
> It's too bad.
But they still support OPENSTEP^W MacOSX 10.2 and 10.3:
http://www.franz.com/support/tech_corner/#macosx-102903
So, I guess the sources have not been lost, they've been upgraded.
> While (as someone else has pointed out) it might not be
> too difficult to build some current open-source Common Lisp on an old
> NeXT box, there was a lot of work in the Allegro implementation
> interfacing to Objective C -- it was possible to do all sorts of close
> interface with Objective C, even doing introspection and defining and
> redefining classes and methods from Lisp. It made interface to the NeXT
> GUI from CL quite practical. The language coupling was far more
> powerful than what can be done, for instance, with C++.
--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein
http://www.theadvocates.org/
Pascal Bourguignon <····@thalassa.informatimago.com> writes:
> But they still support OPENSTEP^W MacOSX 10.2 and 10.3:
> http://www.franz.com/support/tech_corner/#macosx-102903
>
> So, I guess the sources have not been lost, they've been upgraded.
Why do you think there is any shared source? I assume it's a new port.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> Pascal Bourguignon <····@thalassa.informatimago.com> writes:
>
> > But they still support OPENSTEP^W MacOSX 10.2 and 10.3:
> > http://www.franz.com/support/tech_corner/#macosx-102903
> >
> > So, I guess the sources have not been lost, they've been upgraded.
>
> Why do you think there is any shared source? I assume it's a new port.
It is, necessarily. The NeXT was a 68030. MacOSX runs on powerpcs.
The sources may still even be archived somewhere, but they do indeed
lead a trail to our current sources. And even though we purge out
a lot of old and deleted code, we still have some old relics. In fact,
in my src directory, I see a subtdirectory called ... next! It has
very little in it now; I remember when it had a lot more.
We kept our NeXT boxes for quite a while, but I think we purged most
of the old equipment when we made our move to Oakland. I do recall
seeing a bunch of unopened boxes of the old Procyon-based lisp sitting
around, and we were trying to figure out what to do with them. But
for the most part, back then, our manufacturing was JIT-based (no,
JIT doesn't only apply to compilation :-) and we kept very little
media inventory.
--
Duane Rettig ·····@franz.com Franz Inc. http://www.franz.com/
555 12th St., Suite 1450 http://www.555citycenter.com/
Oakland, Ca. 94607 Phone: (510) 452-2000; Fax: (510) 452-0182
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap. It's not the
> most practical computer I've ever had my hand on, but at $0 I wasn't
> going to say no, given how much I enjoyed using them 8 years ago when
> I had a friend who was all NeXT all the time. It'll be a cool public
> terminal to have in the living room for friends -- and I know Steve
> Jobs still uses his, so I'm confident I can integrate it with a Mac
> household. Web browser, word processor, spreadsheet, paint program,
> Objective-C IDE, I've got all of those, but ...
>
> Anyone know what Lisp systems ran on NeXT? Given the era they're
> from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've seen
> from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro 3 that
> ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of AKCL/GCL. I'd
> be interested to hear from anyone who actually used Lisp on one of
> these -- if I'm going to have it in my living room, I want to have the
> appropriate Lisp on it :-)
>
> (If you used any Lisp, Common or otherwise, I'd be interested to hear
> about it).
On NeXT, I used intensively clisp (check it, in the current sources,
there is still a nextapp directory to generate a NeXT application
front end to clisp). I don't know if the current version is still
compilable on NS3.3 or OS4.2, but it probably is. Otherwise, an older
version will do fine.
There is a scheme named zen too. But the more I try to use scheme,
the more I find it a toy environment, compared to common-lisp. Not to
start another discussion on this topic, but I've got the impression
that scheme is really well designed for students: enough stuff to
start programming, but enough stuff missing so you _have_ to
program it...
For software for NeXT, you should check http://www.peanuts.org/
--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein
http://www.theadvocates.org/
Greetings! GCL still has configuration files for NeXT, both m68k and
i386. They probably need a bit of updating. GCL does have a fully
functional linux/m68k port at present, on which it self-builds,
builds maxima and acl2, and most likely (waiting for the Debian
autobuilders...) axiom.
I have an old NeXT too which I'm not using anymore. I've been looking
for a linux port or effort underway, but there doesn't seem to be any
still active.
Please let me and ·········@gnu.org know if you want to try out the
build. It should be straightforward to address any possible issues.
Take care,
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> I recently had an old NeXT workstation fall in my lap. It's not the
> most practical computer I've ever had my hand on, but at $0 I wasn't
> going to say no, given how much I enjoyed using them 8 years ago when
> I had a friend who was all NeXT all the time. It'll be a cool public
> terminal to have in the living room for friends -- and I know Steve
> Jobs still uses his, so I'm confident I can integrate it with a Mac
> household. Web browser, word processor, spreadsheet, paint program,
> Objective-C IDE, I've got all of those, but ...
>
> Anyone know what Lisp systems ran on NeXT? Given the era they're
> from, there *had* to be at least a couple, right? From what I've seen
> from web searches, it looks like there was a version of Allegro 3 that
> ran on black hardware, as well as some old version of AKCL/GCL. I'd
> be interested to hear from anyone who actually used Lisp on one of
> these -- if I'm going to have it in my living room, I want to have the
> appropriate Lisp on it :-)
>
> (If you used any Lisp, Common or otherwise, I'd be interested to hear
> about it).
>
> --
> /|_ .-----------------------.
> ,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
> ,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
> / / `-----------------------'
> ( -. |
> | ) |
> (`-. '--.)
> `. )----'
--
Camm Maguire ····@enhanced.com
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah