C Y wrote:
> --- U-E59264-Osman F Buyukisik <absd00t@c1186.ae.ge.com> wrote:
>
> > GCL 2.4.0 does not build on hpux anymore :-( HPUX support was
> > nonexitent anyways. Bill did not know and the initial port was done
> > by
> > someone who is not involved with hpux anymore. 2.3.8 works ok.
> >
> > I am in favor of maintaining/strengthening CLISP build. Seems to
> > work
> > on any platform. If you need speed, maybe you'll need to buy a
> > commercial common lisp implementation or be lucky cmucl/sbcl
> > working on your platform.
>
> I've wondered about this point - CLISP is slow, granted, but maybe we
> could work with them to find and remove the bottlenecks? There seems
> to be much to recommend CLISP if it weren't for the speed issue. We
> have gcl and cmucl to refer to when suggesting to them what the
> bottlenecks are to remove.
>
Clisp programs are slower since clisp's compiler do not produce
native machine code but rather some special portable code (.fas files).
This approach is more flexible but obviously less efficient.
So this is design concept and can't be easily changed.
--
[ Vadim V. Zhytnikov <vvzhy@mail.ru> <vvzhy@td.lpi.ac.ru> ]