Lisps



>>>>> "Camm" == Camm Maguire <camm@enhanced.com> writes:

    Camm> Also, what about some other non performance issues?

Here is my limited understanding of these things

    Camm> 1) fraction of common lisp standard implemented?

GCL:  CLtL1 with some CLtL2 stuff perhaps.
Clisp:  purports to conform to ANSI Common Lisp
CMUCL/SBCL:  purports to conform to ANSI Common Lisp

    Camm> 2) correctness?

I think the all try to be correct, right?

    Camm> 3) compile process, i.e. to C, asm, other?

GCL:  compiles to C and runs a C compiler to get runnable code.
Clisp: compile to byte codes.
CMUCL: compiles to either byte codes or directly to native code.

    Camm> 4) portability

GCL: reasonably portable?
Clisp:  fairly portable
CMUCL:  very difficult to port

    Camm> 5) license

GCL:  GPL
Clisp: GPL
CMUCL: truly public domain

    Camm> 7) libraries or equivalent

What kind of libraries and how is that relevant to maxima?

I think if Maxima tries to only use ANSI common lisp things with,
perhaps some extensions so plotting, etc can be done, we don't have to
worry about what the underlying lisp is.

Ray