From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <d5ac01e10807010659m717f9dt3c1db29261584441@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue,  1 Jul 2008 16:59:21 +0300
From: "John Waters" <jcwjr215@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net>
In-Reply-To: <3e1162e60807010635ge0c5dbeo5ee47cf8cb2a4042@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1C46BDF7386EBC62A11D65EF@F74D39FA044AA309EAEA14B9>
	<7359f0490806301548q63a7a2bcge5e61e3fa9b65684@mail.gmail.com>
	<3e1162e60807010635ge0c5dbeo5ee47cf8cb2a4042@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] sad commentary
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d2d9039c-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I have always felt guilty about wanting Common LISP on Plan 9; but I
am not entirely sure why.
John

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
>>
>
>