newton@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Mike Newton) (11/27/87)
Recent advertizing by Coral Lisp for their Allegro Common Lisp has
stated that it can produce double-clickable applications. Does
their license agreement state anything regarding royalities if one
sells applications built with Allegro Common Lisp?
Also, does anyone have the sources of a ResEdit type program (not full
featured, just enough of a demo for me to use as an example) that they
are willing to share?
Thanks,
- mike
--
newton@csvax.caltech.edu {ucbvax!cithep,amdahl}!cit-vax!newton
Caltech 256-80 818-356-6771 (afternoons,nights)
Pasadena CA 91125 Beach Bums Anonymous, Pasadena President
"Reality is a lie that hasn't been found out yet..."woodl@byuvax.bitnet (11/28/87)
In a recent telephone conversation with the folks from Coral Lisp, they indicated that the file compiler for double clickable applications was not yet available. I didn't ask about the copyright issues. You may want to give them a call
jasst3@cisunx.UUCP (Jeffrey A. Sullivan) (12/01/87)
In article <4690@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>, newton@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Mike Newton) writes: > > Recent advertizing by Coral Lisp for their Allegro Common Lisp has > stated that it can produce double-clickable applications. Does > their license agreement state anything regarding royalities if one > sells applications built with Allegro Common Lisp? Allegro Common Lisp doesn't yet have the ability to create standalone applications. When I last talked to the folks at Coral (a few weeks), they were saying the beginning of next year. I don't have any idea what the licensing agreement will be like, let's just hope it's not like THINK's.
mailnews@andante.UUCP (Henry Kautz's mailnews program) (03/15/88)
I just ported a substantial piece of software which implements a knowledge representation system to Allegro Common Lisp, implemented by Coral Software of Cambridge Mass. It was one of the most painless porting jobs I've ever experienced. I did this without looking at manuals (I hate manuals), and asking anybody else for help. The debugger, the editor (Fred - Emacs clone) and the listener are all seamlessly integrated, and everything works the way you expect. More gratifying was the performance. To load our largish knowledge base, Coral lisp took about 390 seconds on a Mac II (8MB, 80MB hard disk, multifinder) with about 8 seconds spent GC'ing. By comparison, our Symbolics 3670 behemoths take about 200 seconds to load the same KB. This gives the MacII a 10 to 1 Price/Performance advantage over the 3670. They seem to have neat macpaint-like tools to create window interfaces, which I haven't really played with. More on that later. Prem Devanbu These are solely my personal opinion, not that of my employer. This opinion is unsolicited by any of the employees or owners of Coral Software, none of whom, to my knowledge, I know.
holland@mips.csc.ti.com (Fred Hollander) (03/18/88)
In article <9018@andante.UUCP> mailnews@andante.UUCP (Henry Kautz's mailnews program) writes: > > >More gratifying was the performance. To load our largish knowledge base, >Coral lisp took about 390 seconds on a Mac II (8MB, 80MB hard disk, >multifinder) with about 8 seconds spent GC'ing. By comparison, our >Symbolics 3670 behemoths take about 200 seconds to load the same KB. >This gives the MacII a 10 to 1 Price/Performance advantage over the >3670. > Has Coral published any official benchmarks? This initial observation is very interesting, but I'd like to see how the Mac/Coral combination compares with lisp machines in a wider variety of tests. Fred Hollander Computer Science Center Texas Instruments, Inc. holland%ti-csl@csnet-rela The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments.