al@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Alan M Lesgold) (04/25/91)
I need to connect an intelligent program written in smalltalk (Digitalk version) to some common lisp language tools. Does anyone know of a solid common lisp for MS windows 3.0? It strikes me that the DDE capability of windows would be ideal for the interface between the two systems, but I can't find much in the way of standard lisps for Microsoft Windows 3.0 All help appreciated. --Alan Lesgold FAX: 412-624-9149
turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu (Carl Turner) (04/26/91)
al@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Alan M Lesgold) writes: >Does anyone know of a >solid common lisp for MS windows 3.0? It strikes me that the DDE >capability of windows would be ideal for the interface between the two >systems, but I can't find much in the way of standard lisps for >Microsoft Windows 3.0 All help appreciated. I'm interested in this too. I received (and promptly misplaced) a notice from Gold Hill announcing a Golden Common Lisp that runs under MS Windows 3.0, unless I'm terribly mistaken. Has anyone seen/had any experience with this product? Can I get some opinions on this? Thanks for any help. -- vxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvx v Carl Turner Psychology Department x v turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu University of Florida, Gainesville FL 32611 x vxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvx
rezac@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (04/30/91)
In article <28207@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>, turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu (Carl Turner) writes: > al@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Alan M Lesgold) writes: >>Does anyone know of a >>solid common lisp for MS windows 3.0? It strikes me that the DDE >>capability of windows would be ideal for the interface between the two >>systems, but I can't find much in the way of standard lisps for >>Microsoft Windows 3.0 All help appreciated. > > I'm interested in this too. I received (and promptly misplaced) a notice > from Gold Hill announcing a Golden Common Lisp that runs under MS Windows > 3.0, unless I'm terribly mistaken. Has anyone seen/had any experience > with this product? Can I get some opinions on this? > You might look into Software Engineer from Raindrop Software Corporation. The package is a Lisp based development environment for Windows 3.0. I don't know how close the implementation is to Common Lisp, but it looks like DDE is very easy to implement. Uses about 250k of disk space, 286 or better with 2 megs ram,... No stand-alone exe with current release, but planned for next release (3Q91). Can use up to 16 Meg of memory, generates 286 specific code, and (from the brochure and a phone call) appears to be a well thought out product. For more information call Raindrop at 214/234-2611, fax-214/234-2674, or write Raindrop Software Corporation 845 Arapaho Rd., Suite 105 Richardson, TX 75081 Disclaimer: I haven't actually used the product and am not connected with RSC in any way, but if you have and aren't either I'd like to know what you think of Software Engineer. *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* CHARLES REZAC * bitnet: REZAC@UKANVAX internet: rezac@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*
steve@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Steve Mitchell) (05/10/91)
turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu (Carl Turner) writes: >I'm interested in this too. I received (and promptly misplaced) a notice >from Gold Hill announcing a Golden Common Lisp that runs under MS Windows >3.0, unless I'm terribly mistaken. Has anyone seen/had any experience >with this product? Can I get some opinions on this? I used, or tried to use, Golden Common Lisp (GCL) over several years, and poured several thousand dollars (mostly of other people's money ;{) down that particular silicon rat hole over that period. The early versions were incomplete, rather buggy, and _VERY_ sensitive to the hardware. Both PClones I tried to run it on were (at the time I bought them) on Gold Hill's list of tested, compatible hardware, but neither (a Sperry PC/IT, and a Micronics-based AT/386) were usable until the last version I bought (3.1). It ran - sort of. A big problem (which they might have fixed by now) is that they don't have a compacting garbage collector. GCL gc's, but doesn't clean up after itself, so after you've been running for a while memory gets fragmented and the gc'er goes into an infinite gc loop. Time for the hardware reset button, because the old three-finger salute doesn't make it. To give you a feel for what you can do before it dies, on a system with 5MB of available extended memory dedicated to GCL and without the editor loaded, I got about 75% of the way through a compile-load cycle on May Day PCL before it went off into an infinite gc loop. As for windows support, with version 3.1 they released a Windows 2.1 compatible version called Golden Common Windows (GCWindows). This was about the time Microsoft came out with Windows 3.0. I never even bothered to try out the GCWindows, because I was struggling with getting Windows up at the time. Since then I've gotten Win3 up and running fairly well, and moved on to a Sun 3/60. MUCH BETTER. It works and doesn't require infinte hassle to keep working. (If you have concluded by this time that my PClone is somewhat non-standard, you're right. But it's not _that_odd_ a configuration: everything but GCL works on it just fine. Even Win3, though that took some tuning...) After lots of calls to Gold Hill's tech support, I've come to the conclusion that if you have true blue IBM or vanilla Compaq hardware, 8MB or more RAM, no network, odd boards or strange peripherals and lots of patience, you can probably run GCL and get work done. At least as long as the RAM holds up... I understand they've cut down on the size of the lisp image in more recent releases, so that may help with the gc problem. But until they get a decent garabage collector, I wouldn't even consider trying Gold Hill again. Just another dissatisfied customer... -- - Steve Mitchell College Park Software steve@seabhag.cps.altadena.ca.us 461 W. Loma Alta Dr. seabhag!grian!steve@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov Altadena, CA 91001-3841 ames!elroy!grian!seabhag!steve
meehan@src.dec.com (Jim Meehan) (05/11/91)
I've seen but haven't used Gold Hill's MS-Windows-compatible version of Common Lisp, but I alsoused to work for a company that used GC Lisp from its very earliest days, and indeed, things were rocky back then. Most of Common Lisp wasn't there. But over the years, things got much better, and we actually used GC Lisp in some commercial products. Gold Hill as a company has had its ups and downs, more severe than most companies of its ilk, but they're still there, which is no mean feat. They got on the Expert System Tool/Shell/Lifestyle bandwagon a little late, just as lots of other people were starting to get off. Their home-grown windows effort also seemed to me to be a step in the wrong direction. In the newly reincarnated company, they made what I consider a very smart move: they essentially ditched the expert-system stuff and piggybacked on MS Windows to provide multitasking and all the other goodies that come with that package, in addition to windows, of course. ("If it's better to buy it, don't build it.") It's true that GC Lisp running on small-memory machines won't give you the performance of a full-blooded Lisp on a full-blooded machine, but there's a 30-zillion-true-blue-PC market-niche out there, so it's not as if they're selling to an empty house. Actually, we thought that GC Lisp made a much better delivery platform than development platform; our customers didn't want Lisp -- they didn't want to HEAR about Lisp -- they just wanted their application to run fast. Steve Mitchell complains about GC Lisp's non-compacting garbage collector. Perhaps Gold HIll plans by now to revise it, but not all programs will fragment unto death. It's also worth mentioning that because it didn't compact, it was ridiculously fast. The little "GC" message would light up and go off about a second later; for some of our applications, we stopped worrying entirely about dynamic storage allocation, either because the program wasn't going to fragment memory (that is, it allocated and deallocated objects of just a few sizes), or the program wasn't the sort that would take a long time to run. Anyway, there IS a tradeoff here; it's not as if a compacting, ephemeral, dual-carb, tinted-windows garbage collector is the only reasonable implementation.
turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu (Carl Turner) (05/15/91)
Thanks to all who responded to my request for information about Gold Hill Golden Common LISP. Here is a brief summary of some of the comments received... o It's full (CLtL 1) Common Lisp and supports DDE (among other Windows 3.0 stuff). Gold Hill, Inc 26 Landsdowne St Cambridge, MA 02139 (617) 621-3300 o There's a review comparing the Gold Hill version of Common LISP with Macintosh LISP (old Allegro updated by Apple). It's in the PC-WEEK April 1, 1991. Bottom line: the Mac version is superior, for a variety of reasons. GCLISP doesn't seem to be well integrated with Windows 3.0 and the memory needed to run the package is excessive. But the review said a number of positive things, too, so read it and decide for yourself. o Consider Software Engineer from Raindrop Software Corporation. The package is a Lisp based development environment for Windows 3.0. I don't know how close the implementation is to Common Lisp, but it looks like DDE is very easy to implement. Uses about 250k of disk space, 286 or better with 2 megs ram,... No stand-alone exe with current release, but planned for next release (3Q91). Can use up to 16 Meg of memory, generates 286 specific code, and (from the brochure and a phone call) appears to be a well thought out product. For more information call Raindrop at 214/234-2611, fax-214/234-2674, or write Raindrop Software Corporation 845 Arapaho Rd., Suite 105 Richardson, TX 75081 [The correspondent included the following:] Disclaimer: I haven't actually used the product and am not connected with RSC in any way.... o Personally, I used and enjoyed the student version of GCLISP, and taught myself LISP using it and two books, _Artificial Intelligence_ by Winston, and _LISP_ by Winston and Horn. So, I was predisposed to view the full GCLISP favorably. I'm not put off so much by the unfavorable reviews as I am by the price: $1,995 (Mac Allegro CL is $495). -- vxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvx v Carl Turner Psychology Department x v turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu University of Florida, Gainesville FL 32611 x vxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvxvx