From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60807010703o5d65c3edt2c4875f5d3661787@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 07:03:52 -0700 From: "David Leimbach" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_24504_24510472.1214921032299" References: <1C46BDF7386EBC62A11D65EF@F74D39FA044AA309EAEA14B9> <7359f0490806301548q63a7a2bcge5e61e3fa9b65684@mail.gmail.com> <3e1162e60807010635ge0c5dbeo5ee47cf8cb2a4042@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] sad commentary Topicbox-Message-UUID: d2e8197c-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 ------=_Part_24504_24510472.1214921032299 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:59 AM, John Waters wrote: > I have always felt guilty about wanting Common LISP on Plan 9; but I > am not entirely sure why. > John > Eh, there's lots of code for Common Lisp out there that'd be nice to run on Plan 9 in my opinion. I don't think we're alone in our feelings :-). A lot of time Unix and Lisp have seem a bit at odds... I think there's been papers written on the topic even. Dave > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM, David Leimbach wrote: > >> > >> The question is what new function Plan 9, as an OS, defines for > >> the end user. > >> Plan 9 is not for end users. Plan 9 is for programmers. > > > > I think I just heard the sound of a nail being struck on the head. > > > > I do find myself wanting Lisp, Scheme, and Haskell and all my other weird > > programming toys for Plan 9 too. I believe Haskell and Scheme are > handled, > > but has there ever been a Common Lisp implementation for it? Perhaps I > > should look into a port of SBCL or something. > > Dave > >> > >> -rob > >> > > > > > > ------=_Part_24504_24510472.1214921032299 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:59 AM, John Waters <jcwjr215@gmail.com> wrote:
I have always felt guilty about wanting Common LISP on Plan 9; but I
am not entirely sure why.
John

Eh, there's lots of code for Common Lisp out there that'd be nice to run on Plan 9 in my opinion.  I don't think we're alone in our feelings :-).

A lot of time Unix and Lisp have seem a bit at odds... I think there's been papers written on the topic even.

Dave
 

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>    The question is what new function Plan 9, as an OS, defines for
>> the end user.
>> Plan 9 is not for end users.  Plan 9 is for programmers.
>
> I think I just heard the sound of a nail being struck on the head.
>
> I do find myself wanting Lisp, Scheme, and Haskell and all my other weird
> programming toys for Plan 9 too.  I believe Haskell and Scheme are handled,
> but has there ever been a Common Lisp implementation for it?   Perhaps I
> should look into a port of SBCL or something.
> Dave
>>
>> -rob
>>
>
>


------=_Part_24504_24510472.1214921032299--