I was going to use SBCL to cross compile SBCL for Plan9.
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 8:47 AM, LiteStar numnums<litestar@gmail.com> wrote:[previous message and grotesque signature snipped]
> Well, lisp != common lisp aside, I wouldn't mind a native CL system. I
> haven't looked at the SBCL backend in quite sometime, but, assuming it's not
> terribly insane, that would be a decent route. Most CL work that isn't
> specific to one of the proprietary systems (Allegro, LispWorks, &c.) is
> written with SBCL or, to a lesser extent, CCL. If anyone's interested in
> working on a CL port to plan9, I'll start a lisp cabal, that can work on
> other systems next.
>
> I'll look today...
One challenge with SBCL and some other implementations is that you
need a Common Lisp system already in place to compile them. I looked
into Clisp, which can be compiled with a C compiler, but after
fighting configure for a while I quit.
John
--
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing" -- Rob Pike