> -----Original Message-----
> From: maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu [mailto:maxima-
> bounces at math.utexas.edu] On Behalf Of sen1 at math.msu.edu
> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 12:37 PM
> To: maxima at math.utexas.edu
> Subject: which lisp to use?
>
> Hello,
> I am interested in developing some applications (mostly numerical,
> some symbolic) packages (for use in Dynamical Systems). Some similar
> packages are available already in some form or other in C, fortran,
> etc.
>
> I want to have these packages (and extensions of them) available in a
> more or less seemless way from maxima.
>
> Here are some questions. Any comments, suggestions are welcome.
>
> 1. Is it worthwhile to convert the packages to lisp directly (or to
> use foreign interface calls from lisp)?
I suggest that if purely numerical code is already done in C or Fortran,
consider using f2cl, or foreign function interface. There is f2cl that can
convert (a lot of) fortran into common lisp.
There are foreign function interfaces, including ones that are ported to
many implementations of Lisp, e.g. CFFI, UFFI.
I suggest that anything at all symbolic be done in Lisp or the Maxima
language.
>
> 2. Which lisps do most of you use for development in relation to
> maxima?
I think most people use CMUCL, GCL, CLISP. I use GCL because that is what
the windows install package uses. But when I'm writing code, I use Allegro
Common Lisp, because it has, I think, better tools and a better compiler
than GCL. Allegro can run Maxima, but not all the frills (like plotting)
because no one has bothered to look at the details (Allegro is not free.)
>
> 3. What about the pluses and minuses of gcl, cmucl, or others?
>
A complicated question. Too hard to answer.
RJF