why GCL, what about Allegro



I will try to get someone from Franz Inc to read through this
and make a more specific proposal about what would be
included.  I think that the Maxima system that is distributed
could be made without a compiler, though such a system would
be handicapped for further development.
RJF
Liam Healy wrote:

>>>>>>"Richard" == Richard Fateman <fateman@cs.berkeley.edu> writes:
>>>>>>
> 
>     >> Nothing I do with maxima really takes long,
>     >> so running interpreted isn't so bad.  If compiled, then wouldn't Franz
>     >> really be giving away the complete system with compiler and all since
>     >> maxima gives access to the underlying lisp?
> 
> 
>     Richard> Yes. Which seems odd to me.  That is, someone could take such a
>     Richard> free Maxima+Allegro and try to strip out the maxima code  (or for
>     Richard> that matter, just leave it there!) and run some other lisp program.
>     Richard> I assume there is some way of Franz not "giving away the store"
>     Richard> but I don't know exactly how.  But then the trial version pretty
>     Richard> much gives away the store and they still have a business.
> 
> 
> In the Allegro Enterprise edition, you are given a "dynamic runtime"
> (I think its called) license.  This permits you to distribute runtime
> images I _think_ only for noncommercial purposes.  However, the images
> are not complete - things are stripped out before the image is made,
> including most notably the compiler.  The recepient can interpret any
> random CL code to his heart's content, but there is no compiler.
> 
> More info can be had from Franz Inc.  
> 
> Liam
>