From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <283f5df10909070547i33935f1bs91a4ab9cbdb590e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <1d5d51400909070029o5610bb4wb45eed2596313c9b@mail.gmail.com> <283f5df10909070547i33935f1bs91a4ab9cbdb590e2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 08:54:37 -0400 Message-ID: <7d3530220909070554q27a95bc8mf8ad670fcdf37008@mail.gmail.com> From: John Floren To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [9fans] lisp again. Topicbox-Message-UUID: 68cac48e-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 8:47 AM, LiteStar numnums wrote: > 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... [previous message and grotesque signature snipped] 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