marr-leon@CS.Yale.EDU (Leon Marr) (08/25/88)
After being deluged with requests for info, and after sending out copies on three or four separate mailings, all of which had full to: and cc: fields, and after a suggestion that I really ought to post my findings, I am finally doing so. The bounce messages I keep getting from various intermediate sites finally convinced me that this was the way to go. Thanks again to everyone who gave info; sorry about the delay to anyone who wanted the summary. Here are the replies to my question about Apl interpreters for the Mac: =====(Summary follows)========================================================= From: Jan Deleeuw <deleeuw@math.ucla.edu> There are at least three apl interpreters for the mac. The first one is mac apl, which has the nicest interface. It is slow, but generally very well done (by Michael O'Conner, of CIS-Navigator fame). There is a demo- version which can be ftp-ed from sumex-aim@stanford.edu, directory <info-mac>. The more professional systems are APL-68000 by Micro-Apl (available at the moment for a mere $ 99 from Spencer Organization). This is fast (entirely written in assembler), although not blindingly fast (it does not use the 68020 and the 68881). Documentation is reasonable, although some of the Mac features (terminal emulation) do not work, and the toolbox interface is far from easy to use. (by the way, in Mac-APL you can also use the Toolbox routines, by calling their traps in assembler, but this is a major pain). Finally there is STSC-APL, with which I have no experience, but this is probably a straightforward port from the PC. Hope this helps. Jan de Leeuw =============================================================================== From: Lee Dickey <ljdickey%water.waterloo.edu@RELAY.CS.NET> There are four known systems, two are recommended. (1) STSC APL*Plus, $???. (2) APL.68000, from Spencer Organization, $99. (3) MacAPL, Leptonic Systems ? (4) MacAPL, New Zealand STSC is more fully developed, I think. APL.68000 is faster, written in assembly language (Van Cleve) Leptonic Systems has gone belly up. Too bad. It had nice features. MacAPL from NZ is free to UNIX license holders, Probably derived from Bruner & Reeves APL. Both (1) and (2) include APL terminal emulators. -- =============================================================================== From: csaron%garnet.Berkeley.EDU@violet.berkeley.edu (Aron Roberts) Subject: Old info on Mac APL interpreters Leon, Apologies for the age of the article below, but perhaps it will give you a place to start if you don't receive more current information from your other correspondents ... Aron Aron Roberts Tolman Microcomputer Facility 1535 Tolman Hall, University of California Berkeley, CA 94720 (415) 642-2251 csaron@garnet.Berkeley.EDU CSARON@UCBCMSA.BITNET ----- Article 193 of comp.sys.mac: Path: jade!ucbcad!ames!sri-spam!rutgers!clyde!watmath!watnot!water!ljdickey Thanks, everyone, for all the info I received on APL for the Mac! If anyone wants a copy of the summary, please mail me, and I will forward it. From: ljdickey@water.UUCP (Lee Dickey) Subject: Re: APL for the Mac Date: 24 Nov 86 19:06:26 GMT Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario I know of three APL's for the Mac: APL.68000 APL.Plus APL 90 The first two are about $395 each, and the other is shareware. The most mature, APL.68000, may be obtained from from Spencer Organization, Inc. 366 Kinderkamack Road P.O. Box 248 Westwood, New Jersey 07675 (201)-666-6011 or from Micro APL Limited, Unit 1F, Nine Elms Industrial Estate 87 Kirtling Street London SW8 5BP (01)-622-0395 This APL has been around for quite a while, and is relatively bug free in the core code. I have not tried the Mac version but other versions of APL.68000 are quite robust. The second, APL*Plus, is based on what was previously called PortaAPL, and comes from STSC, Inc 2115 East Jefferson Street Rockville, MD 20852 (301)-984-5000 STSC has been in the APL business for 17 years, has a successful APL product for the PC, and claim that this new release is fully compatible with that and its mainframe products. The third, APL 90, comes from Jean-Jacques Girardot Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines St. Etienne, France or from Fred Gross New Products Editor 1100 Richards Ave. Santa Fe, New Mexico (505)-827-7872 The main problem with this release of APL 90 for North Americans is that it uses the French keyboard layout. Fred wants you to send two floppies and the cost of postage before he sends you his latest copy of APL 90. There are reviews in the latest (Dec., 86) and forthcoming (Mar. 87) issues of APL Quote Quad. =============================================================================== From: Stuart Schmukler <sas1@sphinx.uchicago.edu> You can try: STSC APL*Plus MicroAPL from The Spencer Orginization MicroAPL is small and fast and runs on a MAC II or SE. I do not think that the STSC APL has NOT been upgraded yet to run on those machines. There is a third commerical one that was floating around, but I have lost the reference and I only saw a demo copy. SaS =============================================================================== This last article came in after I posted my summary announcement: From: wchang@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (William I-Wei Chang) The APL Quote-Quad gave a nearly glowing review of APL.68000 (March 1987 issue); the major subject of complaint was a non- standard file system. I have also heard that it is written in assembler (so is four times faster than STSC APL*PLUS for the Mac), has been around since the early days of the 68000 (so the APL language implementation is certainly robust), and is more Mac-ish than STSC's. It also used to cost $300! But since I have never used it, I can't tell you if any of the above is valid or not. You also should be wary of buying an orphan product (I have no idea whether this is one; see below). I have STSC's APL*PLUS, and generally I'm happy with it. It used to be PortaAPL and is written in C. When I bought it (I got a great deal; list price is $400) I thought I was getting a product with a future; after I talked to some STSC folks, however, I changed my mind. I probably bought an orphan after all. The author of the program is no longer interested in enhancing it (I was told) to make it more Mac-ish (it is not very; although it has a bunch of low level Mac stuff built-in, since the distribution is small nobody I know of has built any high level tools on top of it). It is NOT Mac II compatible, and my guess is that it won't be until enough people buy it. (A nearly Mac II compatible version was reputed to be near completion many months ago, but they have no plans at present to release an update. Hmm.) It is, however, compatible with STSC's other APLs, and works fine. If anyone (STSC in particular) would like to challenge my interpretation of the situation, please do! I also looked at the shareware MacAPL archived at INFO-MAC. First, IT IS NOT FREE. The shareware fee is $100 or so. Second, I can't imaging anyone having paid that fee, so the amount is academic. APL is a programming language (:-), and no crippled subset of it should be called APL! MacAPL lacks some of the basic primitives, so is in my opinion useless. It also bombs a lot and the demo does not save workspaces. In its defense, I would like to say that MacAPL has a lot of NEAT IDEAS, such as multiple windows/workspaces, icons and graphics. Maybe the author of MacAPL can sell his ideas to STSC.... Definitely check it out for the interesting ideas, but I don't think it is useable. Lastly, there is an implementation of an extension of APL from France, called APL90 (91?). From what I read in the APL Conference Proceedings, it is totally new and very interesting. Which unfortunately makes it more a curiosity than anything else. I haven't seen it; it can be obtained by sending two 3-1/2" diskettes and stamped, addressed mailer to Fred Gross, APL Quote-Quad New Products Editor, 1100 Richards Ave., Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505. So, it seems that Spencer Organization's $99 deal for APL.68000 is a bargain. If I don't have an APL already I would buy it -- provided I can be sure that the product will continue to be supported. At the current rate of Mac evolution, a stagnant product will probably not last even a year. ================================================================================ Hope this helps. Enjoy, and use in good health, Leon Marr marr@cs.yale.edu lmarr%eagle@wesleyan.bitnet