sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Steve B Cousins) (10/25/89)
Is it possible/reasonable/a good idea to develop CL appliations over CLX? In particular, if I had a Sun running Franz lisp with CLX, and another workstation running an X server (shouldn't that be client?), could the remote site be set up to edit and test code, or is CLX designed mainly as a delivery vehicle for applications? Also, has anyone used both CLX and Coral/Allegro on the Mac? How similar are the windowing environments? Coral uses Object LISP. Does/can CLX use CLOS in a similar way? Thanks in advance for any info or pointers. Steve Cousins sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu Washington University 314-362-6968 St. Louis, MO
barmar@kulla (Barry Margolin) (10/25/89)
In article <1989Oct24.183645.9930@wucs1.wustl.edu> sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Steve B Cousins) writes: >Is it possible/reasonable/a good idea to develop CL appliations over >CLX? In particular, if I had a Sun running Franz lisp with CLX, and >another workstation running an X server (shouldn't that be client?), could the >remote site be set up to edit and test code, or is CLX designed mainly >as a delivery vehicle for applications? I don't understand. How would you deliver those applications without developing them? Are you asking whether it's reasonable to use CLX all by itself rather than using a higher level package that is built on top of CLX? I'd say that using bare CLX would be pretty tough, but there aren't many available alternatives. You'd have to develop all your own routines for things like menus. Just as most X programmers in C don't use Xlib all by itself, Lisp programmers also need toolkits and widget libraries. Xerox has developed a high level Lisp interface to the C toolkits, and Lucid, Symbolics and ILA are working on a Common Lisp Interface Manager (CLIM) that implements object-oriented I/O routines that they plan to propose as a standard. >Does/can CLX use CLOS in a similar way? CLX doesn't use CLOS; it only needs structures. There's a package called CLUE (Common Lisp User Environment), which is a simple, object-oriented toolkit library that uses CLOS. It provides some basic window classes, some stream I/O facilities, and a few other utilities. It's still pretty low level (it's a toolkit, but not a widget library). Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Steve B Cousins) (10/25/89)
In article <31035@news.Think.COM> barmar@kulla (Barry Margolin) writes: >In article <1989Oct24.183645.9930@wucs1.wustl.edu> sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Steve B Cousins) writes: >>Is it possible/reasonable/a good idea to develop CL appliations over >>CLX? In particular, if I had a Sun running Franz lisp with CLX, and > >I don't understand. How would you deliver those applications without >developing them? ... > >barmar@think.com >{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar I guess my question was a little unclear, although the rest of the response was helpful to me anyway... When I asked about developing CL applications _over_ CLX, I meant to mean "over" as in "over the network". In other words, if I have a Sun in one room, and I'm sitting at an X server in another room, am I sitting at a reasonable development environment, or should I develop my lisp code at the Sun console and write applications that could only be USED at the X server. I read your reply as saying that I probably don't want to use CLX alone to do anything with. I was hoping to be able to sit at my Mac and run Mac X connected across the net to a Sun running Franz's product as an alternative to using Allegro on the Mac when I needed more performance. I can do that with Telnet now, but I was hoping for a better development environment. Is it safe to say that such things are still pretty premature? Steve Cousins sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu
barmar@kulla (Barry Margolin) (10/26/89)
In article <1989Oct25.155852.20583@wucs1.wustl.edu> sbc@wucs1.UUCP (Steve B Cousins) writes: >I read your reply as saying that I probably don't want to use CLX alone to >do anything with. I was hoping to be able to sit at my Mac and run Mac X >connected across the net to a Sun running Franz's product as an alternative >to using Allegro on the Mac when I needed more performance. I can do that >with Telnet now, but I was hoping for a better development environment. >Is it safe to say that such things are still pretty premature? Yes, you managed to figure out the answer. Developing over CLX is like developing on Unix over Xlib -- they're just low-level subroutine libraries. If you have Mac X and a Sun, what you CAN do is run GNU Emacs on the Sun, having it display on the Mac using X. You can then run Franz in a shell-mode buffer inside Emacs. If you're developing CLX-based applications, they can then display on the Mac as well. Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
lou@bearcat.rutgers.edu (Lou Steinberg) (10/28/89)
In article <1989Oct25.155852.20583@wucs1.wustl.edu> sbc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Steve B Cousins) writes: > I guess my question was a little unclear, although the rest of the response > was helpful to me anyway... When I asked about developing CL applications > _over_ CLX, I meant to mean "over" as in "over the network". In other > words, if I have a Sun in one room, and I'm sitting at an X server in another > room, am I sitting at a reasonable development environment, or should I > develop my lisp code at the Sun console and write applications that could > only be USED at the X server. If by "Franz" you mean Allegro Common Lisp from Franz Inc (as opposed to Franz Lisp, the language), then yes, it is just as reasonable to sit at your MAC as at the Sun console. All the window-based debugging tools that I have seen for Allegro Common Lisp (the Sun version) work over X. These tools are reasonable, although not up to the level one would see on a Lisp Machine. By the way, I would second the recommendation of a previous poster to run Lisp (of any kind) under Emacs. In particular, Franz Inc. has a very nice package for GNU emacs that provides a nice environment for running lisp under emacs. You can even run emacs on one machine and lisp on another, although you lose certain facilities by doing so. -- Lou Steinberg uucp: {pretty much any major site}!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!lou arpa: lou@cs.rutgers.edu
mfi@serc.cis.ufl.edu (Mark Interrante) (10/29/89)
In article <31035@news.Think.COM> barmar@kulla (Barry Margolin) writes: ... Lucid, >Symbolics and ILA are working on a Common Lisp Interface Manager (CLIM) >that implements object-oriented I/O routines that they plan to propose as a >standard. > >barmar@think.com >{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar What information is available on CLIM and is the programmers interface stable? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Interrante Software Engineering Research Center mfi@beach.cis.ufl.edu CIS Department, University of Florida 32611 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Imagine what it would be like if TV actually were good. It would be the end of everything we know." Marvin Minsky
barmar@kulla (Barry Margolin) (10/30/89)
In article <21124@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> mfi@serc.cis.ufl.edu (Mark Interrante) writes: >What information is available on CLIM and is the programmers interface >stable? You could try contacting International Lisp Associates in Cambridge, MA (I don't know their current phone number or address, their office moved early this year). The interface should be pretty stable by now. Symbolics is expected to be including it in Genera 8.0, which will be in beta test soon (if not already). Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar