Re: [Axiom-developer] CCL maintenance.

[C Y]

--- Waldek Hebisch <address@hidden> wrote:
 
> Well, slow program gets answers faster than program which does not
> work at all.

Agreed :-).

> CCL/Clisp are good solutions is situations when
> gcl/sbcl/cmucl do not work.

Yes.

> Both Clisp and CCL are bytecode interpreters, so for can not be very
> fast, but are faster than many folks would think hearing
> "interpreter".

Ah.  If CCL is also bytecode, I would expect that any performance gains
over Clisp would be sufficiently marginal that Clisp's support of ANSI
makes it the winner, but that's just me.  Of course Clisp is GPL, so if
someone wants to do a closed bytecode based Axiom they would need to
either revive CCL or look elsewhere.  Personally I am fine with Clisp -
if someone wants to go commercial closed source with Axiom they are
allowed to, but we don't have to do all the work to make it easy for
them.  Just MHO.

Cheers,
CY


       
____________________________________________________________________________________Luggage?
 GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz