On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Oliver Kullmann
<O.Kullmann at swansea.ac.uk>wrote:
> Hello,
>
> when trying to build Sbcl on a Linux system using clisp it seemed first
> to work, but then, late in the build, I got
>
> sbcl-1.0.52-source.tar.bz2
> > cd sbcl-1.0.52
> > sh make.sh "clisp"
>
Seems to me you should be asking on the sbcl list instead of maxima. IIRC
clisp cannot build sbcl, but cmucl or ccl can.
Or just go grab a binary of sbcl (or cmucl or ccl).
>
> HOWEVER, anyway, the only point for us trying Sbcl is that we are
> looking for an open-source Lisp (usable for Maxima) faster than Ecl.
> And I got the impression that Sbcl can't be faster then Ecl, or
> am I wrong?
>
If the testsuite is any indication, sbcl and cmucl are faster than ecl.
Can't remember if ccl is or not. But also, it used to be that gcl ran the
testsuite faster than any of these. Don't know if that's true anymore.
However, I think the testsuite these days consists of a lot of number
crunching code, so that might bias the results if you're doing symbolic
stuff.
Ray