Lisp on Mac OS X
in [Lisp]
|
From: Paul Donnelly on 13 Feb 2010 18:47 Leo <sdl.web(a)gmail.com> writes: > Paul Donnelly <paul-donnelly(a)sbcglobal.net> writes: > >> Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)nospam.net> writes: >> >>> I was leaning toward sbcl, but I think that it's a VM-based implementation - >>> everything in an image! I like file-based... >> >> SBCL works like every other CL. > > I tried compiling sbcl on osx with threads and it had some failures > during testing. that was version 1.0.31 if I remember correctly. SBCL's view on source files is the same as other implementations', that is.
From: Paul Donnelly on 13 Feb 2010 19:00 Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)nospam.net> writes: > On 2010-02-13, Paul Donnelly <paul-donnelly(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)nospam.net> writes: >> >>> I was leaning toward sbcl, but I think that it's a VM-based implementation - >>> everything in an image! I like file-based... >> >> SBCL works like every other CL. > > Meaning? That it is VM-based like all others? or file-based like all others? > Remember - I don't know squat about CL! Just started the other day. ;) Sorry, silly assumption on my part. Source files are the dominant approach to writing and loading code. CL differs from some languages in that code is loaded into a running image (not necessarily a virtual machine) rather than being compiled into a standalone executable, so the question is muddied. The in-memory image can usually be dumped to a file and reloaded to pick up where you left off or speed startup. Lisp code, however, is usually stored in plain text files, rather than in a Smalltalk-style in-image database. Of course you can do what you like, as long as "what you like" doesn't involve assuming that your Lisp will store loaded code in a form suitable for source storage, though it might include storing source in-image yourself.
From: Duke Normandin on 13 Feb 2010 19:04 On 2010-02-13, Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > I would hazard a guess that you are getting sidetracked on > non-issues. Just use the standard tools and start programming, and stop > worrying about these things. I think that you are dead-on correct! After reading the last 10 posts in this thread, I'm more confused that when I first asked the question. ;) Never mind, that _my_ problem, nobody else's. Like you say I just start reading and hacking away -- what can go wrong? There's always another Lisp around the corner. ;) -- Duke *** Tolerance becomes a crime, when applied to evil [Thomas Mann] ***
From: Slobodan Blazeski on 13 Feb 2010 19:29 On Feb 13, 2:15 pm, Aleksandr Vinokurov <aleksandr....(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Duke Normandin <dukeofp...(a)nospam.net> writes: > > On 2010-02-12, Aleksandr Vinokurov <aleksandr....(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Feb 11, 10:52 pm, Duke Normandin <dukeofp...(a)nospam.net> wrote: > > >>http://www.gigamonkeys.com/lispbox/-- Allegro CL & CCL are in bundles > >> for OS X. > > > I wish that I had known about that site before I started digging > > around.. ;) > > Actually I don't remember how I found it myself, seems there were no > link from the book, AFAIK. > > > > >> I'm on reading this book too, and I've choosen Allegro CL. As I > >> understand Peter > >> Siebel uses standard CL language and does not digg in differencies of > >> implementations... So we will not find any GUI quirks in his book :) > > > For no particular reason - other than I was visiting their site - I decided > > to install Allegro-CL. I see that it comes with both a GUI (allegro-express) > > and a terminal app (alisp). > > I've read the company historyhttp://www.franz.com/about/company.history.lhtmland was attracted to > go > with its implementation for my start. They have very cool technologies in AllegroCache and AllegroGraph but be prepared to shell some serious money. Slobodan
From: Duke Normandin on 13 Feb 2010 22:12
On 2010-02-14, Paul Donnelly <paul-donnelly(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)nospam.net> writes: > >> On 2010-02-13, Paul Donnelly <paul-donnelly(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>> Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)nospam.net> writes: >>> >>>> I was leaning toward sbcl, but I think that it's a VM-based implementation - >>>> everything in an image! I like file-based... >>> >>> SBCL works like every other CL. >> >> Meaning? That it is VM-based like all others? or file-based like all others? >> Remember - I don't know squat about CL! Just started the other day. ;) > > Sorry, silly assumption on my part. Source files are the dominant > approach to writing and loading code. CL differs from some languages in > that code is loaded into a running image (not necessarily a virtual > machine) rather than being compiled into a standalone executable, so the > question is muddied. The in-memory image can usually be dumped to a file > and reloaded to pick up where you left off or speed startup. Lisp code, > however, is usually stored in plain text files, rather than in a > Smalltalk-style in-image database. > > Of course you can do what you like, as long as "what you like" doesn't > involve assuming that your Lisp will store loaded code in a form > suitable for source storage, though it might include storing source > in-image yourself. Thanks! I'm slowly getting the hang of the way Lisp(s) operate. My past experience has been with Perl, PHP, TCL/Tk, some COBOL, and some Forth. I do like newLISP though. -- Duke *** Tolerance becomes a crime, when applied to evil [Thomas Mann] *** |