[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance.
From: |
Stephen Wilson |
Subject: |
Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance. |
Date: |
30 May 2007 11:37:40 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 |
Hello Waldek,
Waldek Hebisch <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > *,
> >
> > Are any of the current maintainers working with CCL at all? Is
> > maintaining compatability with this Lisp of importance to anyone?
> >
>
> I checked that CCL from Nag Cdrom builds OK. ATM I do not intend
> to do any serious work on CCL, but I intend to check if current
> Axiom is still compatible with CCL. IMHO we should choose one
> of possible directions:
>
> 1) Make sure that CCL really works for building Axiom
> 2) Drop CCL support completly
It was in thinking about these two options exactly which promoted my
email.
> Current state, that is having a lot of code to support CCL, but
> no testing of this code gives us the combined disadvantages of
> the possibilities above: we are spending time on CCL support code,
> but CCL does not work out of the box.
>
> >From my point of view main advantage of CCL is that it is quite
> portable. Also, it looks that CCL can be cross-compiled with
> basically the same effort as for native build. There is also
> licencing issue: IIUC CCL licence is pretty liberal when somebody
> wants to deliver closed source program on top of CCL, but is
> GPL incompatible.
I am not a fan of the license myself. I doubt Codemist Ltd would let
it go under three-clause BSD. Im not interested in improving software
under a license like this.
> Big disadvantage is lack of Ansi compatibility.
Yes, a big disadvantage indeed. In addition, if CCL were to be
supported by axiom, it would be us who would need to maintain and
improve it. I personally have little interest in enhancing CCL into a
full Common Lisp, there are plenty of other lisps out there which do
that for me already.
>
> Clisp is also quite portable, so it is possible that CCL offers
> no advantages over clisp (but this requires more analysis).
Clisp is portable, and has most ANSI issues ironed out. I dont have
the need myself to analyze CCL to figure Clisp has all the advantages.
At this time, I am all for dropping CLL support.
Thanks,
Steve
- Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance., (continued)
- Re: [Axiom-developer] NAG libraries, Gernot Hueber, 2007/05/31
- Re: [Axiom-developer] NAG libraries, Martin Rubey, 2007/05/31
- Re: [Axiom-developer] NAG libraries, Gernot Hueber, 2007/05/31
- Re: [Axiom-developer] NAG libraries, Waldek Hebisch, 2007/05/31
- Re: [Axiom-developer] NAG libraries, Martin Rubey, 2007/05/31
- Re: [Axiom-developer] NAG libraries, Gernot Hueber, 2007/05/31
Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance.,
Stephen Wilson <=
RE: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance., Bill Page, 2007/05/30
Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance., Stephen Wilson, 2007/05/30
Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance., Gabriel Dos Reis, 2007/05/30
Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance., Stephen Wilson, 2007/05/30