--- "Liam M. Healy" <Liam.Healy@nrl.navy.mil> wrote:
> This is a great idea, but sadly, FFIs are not standard between CL
> implementations.
Just out of morbid curosity, is there any hope that someone will
actually define a standard for FFIs? This seems to be one of the major
weaknesses of Lisp.
Also, how much difference is there between the FFIs of the three/four
lisps we are actually going to support? If only minor changes are
needed between each lisp, that might be worthwhile. Things like the
GSI, pari and Octave would be very nice to include, particularly if we
didn't have to reimpliment them in Lisp.
CY
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
http://auctions.yahoo.com