Re: [9fans] lisp

["David Leimbach" <leimy2k@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1085 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 7:08 AM, Dave Eckhardt
<davide+p9@cs.cmu.edu<davide%2Bp9@cs.cmu.edu>>
wrote:

> > cmucl is directly executable but it has only enough
> > intelligence to load a big lisp.core, which contains
> > all the smarts.
>
> If these core files aren't generated all *that* often,
> one could write a tool which would turn a core file
> into a byte array, link a new lisp executable, and
> exec() that.  I realize that's not an answer to the
> question as posed, but...
>
> Dave Eckhardt
>
> I'm not sure if any action is being taken just yet on which Lisp to "go
for" but, if I were porting a lisp I'd be looking at either CMUCL or SBCL,
and probably lean more towards SBCL, as they've done a bit of work to make
bootstrapping a little nicer.

I like Dave Eckhardt's idea.  I don't think core files get changed that
often, however sometimes when one produces a "standalone" product from one
of the above SBCL or CMUCL, you do want to make your own core file and
distribute it.  That's still a pretty static process if my memory serves me.

Dave

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1428 bytes --]