[Openmcl-devel] CCL on Solaris sparc architecture
ron at flownet.com
Wed Jan 27 20:12:59 UTC 2010
On Jan 27, 2010, at 11:22 AM, Helmut Eller wrote:
> * Ron Garret [2010-01-27 19:39+0100] writes:
>> Ah. Well, in that case I am at a loss. I can't imagine why anyone
>> would care about a compiler front end (or use a Sparc for that matter)
>> unless they cared about performance.
> Good compiler messages and debugging information need a reasonably good
Why not use SBCL then? Its front end is arguably better than CCL and it has a Sparc back end.
>> And I can't imagine why anyone
>> would use a JVM back end unless they didn't.
> There exist plenty of libraries for the JVM that would be available to
> Lisp without the need to go through the FFI/JNI. It would also be
> easier to make a Lisp library available to Java/JRuby/Jython/Jwhatever.
Ah. Well, if that's part of your quality metric then that is a quandry. Have you considered Clojure? Or Kawa? SISC? Maybe even Jython? Or do you really need Common Lisp? If so, have you considered paying Clozure Associates to write a JVM back end for you?
Feel free to treat those as rhetorical questions.
More information about the Openmcl-devel