Vadim V. Zhytnikov wrote:
>
> Richard Fateman wrote:
RJF:
>>
>>1. Yes, let's do it. It makes our lives simpler.
>> (We still need to understand what restrictions we
>> can live with.)
>>
>>2. No, only open-source GPL code allowed here.
>>
>>3. It's just another Lisp, along with GCL etc to support.
>>Do it if you want to.
>>
>>4. Something else.
>>
>>If you are inclined towards reaction 1, we still
>>need to make our list of "non-negotiable demands".
>>They must be such that Franz Inc's business is
>>placed in jeopardy. If we use this code it is
>>in our best interests that the company remain profitable.
>>
>>RJF
>>
>>
>
Vadim:
> Sorry, I don't quite grasp your idea. In particular difference
> between 1 and 3. Do you suggest to make Allegro CL
> the primary Lisp for Maxima?
I think that it will make some of our lives easier if
we say "download the pre-loaded Maxima/Allegro version for your system"
in response to "I can't compile GCL on Redhat x.y")
It appears that some participants are already planning
on compiling Maxima on Allegro CL. I assume it will
not be difficult. I did so a few years ago at Berkeley.
> If so then I would rather
> support options 3. Any extra Lisps are welcomed and
> I honestly believe that Allegro Common Lisp is better
> than non commercial Lisps we have. But I don't like
> to rely on any closed source binaries.
I understand the feeling. However, I don't have sources
for Windows :) .
> Imagine the
> company which provided them ceased to operate
> (like Macsyma Inc. does) where do I get new ones?
This might be uncomfortable, though Franz Inc has been in
business for something like 15 years, all of them
profitable. This contrasts with Macsyma Inc, which
I suspect was never profitable.
In any case, I guess you'd still have the old software.
> Maxima is attractive to me due to availability of
> complete source code (including Lisp) which doesn't
> depend on any vendor.
>
> Vadim
>
>
> --
>
> [ Vadim V. Zhytnikov <vvzhy@mail.ru> <vvzhy@td.lpi.ac.ru> ]
>
>
>
>