| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1503.1 | Can I have a look ? | YIPPEE::GOULNIK | OogaboogaBox type | Wed Jun 29 1988 08:10 | 8 |
|
I don't have Cambridge Lisp, which by the way is no longer supported
distributed or otherwise updated by Metacomco, due to poor sales.
Still, I'd be more than interested to get the source, and why not,
try it out with XLisp (although it won't compile).
Iv.
|
| 1503.2 | Sorry, I don't know what came over me.. flame .. | Z::TENNY | Dave Tenny - VAX LISP Development | Wed Jun 29 1988 15:07 | 15 |
|
Ops5 on XLISP, gack. I hope you have days to kill waiting for rule
firings.
I WANT A DAMN COMMON LISP FOR THE AMIGA,
not xlisp, with its bugs, interpreted slowness, etc.
If anyone ever hears of this beast really (not rumored to be) marketed
for the amiga, let me know.
Lack of availability of a good lisp for the amiga is the
only time I ever regret buying this machine. Cambridge Lisp is
a joke too, only it costs more.
Frustrated,
Dave
|
| 1503.3 | My head is screwed on | AUNTB::PRESSLEY | | Thu Jun 30 1988 12:43 | 2 |
| I have miss placed the source (*%$#). It came from an ST BBS.
The guy who gave it to me is now gone!
|
| 1503.4 | do it yourself | SAUTER::SAUTER | John Sauter | Thu Jun 30 1988 14:02 | 11 |
| re: .2
Why don't you implement Common Lisp for the Amiga yourself? Much
of the system is coded in Lisp, so you don't have to hand-code all
of the functions---it's probably no worse than porting Unix(tm).
If you do a good job, you can probably sell it. Look at AmigaTeX.
I first used Lisp (version 1.6) in 1967, and I once coded an
implementation in PDP-6 Fortran IV (never debugged it though).
Using C and a modern computer (the Amiga) it should be duck soup.
John Sauter
|
| 1503.5 | | Z::TENNY | Dave Tenny - VAX LISP Development | Thu Jun 30 1988 14:55 | 18 |
| re: Why don't you implement Common Lisp for the Amiga yourself? Much
Don't think that I haven't considered it in the past.
However, there were several problem with this particular task,
aside from the enormity of it. Since I work for the lisp group
here, I'm fairly sure that any common lisp I did for the amiga as a product
would be considered in conflict of interest.
Further, I want a good extensible integrated editor, debugger etc..
a lot of additional work. There are several common lisps on the mac
with all of these features.
I've also considered Kyoto Common Lisp as well, which is a highly portable
C version of lisp. But even this takes time, and right now I have
this other little pet project which seems to consume all my spare time.
(Hit KP7 if you're curious...)
Dave
|