From: mikel <mi...@ev...> - 2004-11-15 20:03:37
|
Tim Daly Jr. wrote: > mikel <mi...@ev...> writes: > ... > >>Do you folks, the CMUCL and SBCL implementors, have any advice or >>information that you think might influence the decision that the Skate >>group makes about what Lisp to use for implementation? > > > Could you perhaps clarify why you need to choose a single > implementation? Maybe that would make it obvious which would be best. > Each candidate Lisp is missing some required features, and the missing features vary. The more Lisps we support, therefore, the more missing features we must implement. Therefore, to start with, we are trying to choose a single reference Lisp. It is our express intention to make Skate as portable as possible, across Lisps as well as operating systems, and there has already been some preliminary discussion of what would need to be in an abstraction layer to facilitate portability. However, early and frequent release is a goal, so it behooves us to choose a Lisp the is as close as possible to ideal. Again, the big missing features seem to be Unicode support and Win32 support. SBCL has the first, and CMUCL seems about to have the second. Any other thoughts anyone cares to share would be welcome. --me |