On 11/11/11, Oliver Kullmann <O.Kullmann at swansea.ac.uk> wrote:
> 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 Sbcl is not faster than Ecl, then we don't need to install Sbcl,
> and the above problem is moot.
I don't remember whether ECL is faster than SBCL or vice versa.
In any event, if I recall correctly, the difference is something like
25 % on the Maxima test suite.
So my guess is that there is not much to gain by trying to get SBCL to work.
Clisp is, by far, the slowest of the Lisp implementations; it is something
like 1/3 the speed of GCL on the Maxima test suite.
That's worth considering, if speed is a consideration.
But all the others that I've worked with (ECL, GCL, CCL, SBCL)
are not so different from each other.
Well, there is also ABCL, which is very, very slow; something like
1/10 the speed of GCL on the Maxima test suite.
FWIW
Robert Dodier