kitchel@iucs.cs.indiana.edu (07/22/87)
Re: Coral Lisp There is a review of Coral CommonLisp, ObjectLogo and MacScheme+Toolsmith in the most recent MacUser magazine. (See the article about Expert Systems.) The reviewer (if I recall correctly; maybe Ollie has read it too and can correct me) claims that the Coral product is not a full Common Lisp. This, of course, is not surprising. MacScheme comes off quite well in the review. It gives you everything that is claimed for it and more than you probably would expect, i.e. a nicer interface into the toolbox. Sid Kitchel Computer Science Dept. Indiana University kitchel@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
jts@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (Jim Sasaki) (07/24/87)
> There is a review of Coral Common Lisp ... in the [August] MacUser.... The > reviewer (if I remember correctly ...) claims that the Coral product is not > a full Common Lisp. Hate to correct you, but you remember incorrectly. The article says that ExperCommon Lisp is not Common Lisp. (Apparently ExperCommon Lisp doesn't include defstruct or full lexical closures.) The article doesn't mention Coral Common Lisp except to say that it is scheduled for 1987. There's an ad for Coral Common Lisp in the same issue of MacUser, but I don't know if they are actually shipping. > MacScheme comes off quite well in the review. It gives you everything that > is claimed for it and more than you probably would expect, i.e. a nicer > interface into the toolbox. It does indeed sound nice, though the article says that it's slow. I'd very seriously consider buying it if could produce stand-alone applications. Does anyone know if that's in the cards? ---------- -- Jim Sasaki, CS dept., Upson Hall, Cornell Univ., Ithaca NY 14853 (jts@gvax.cs.cornell.edu, {decvax|uw-beaver|vax135|...}!cornell!jts)
bc@apple.UUCP (bill coderre) (07/24/87)
Please! The review in MacUser was about EXPER "Common" Lisp, not CORAL Common Lisp. They are completely different products. I'll restrain myself from saying anything about ExperTelligence's Lisp. Just read the review. Let's just not confuse the issue...............................bc
paul@fcstools.UUCP (Paul Perkins) (07/25/87)
In article <119200003@iucs> kitchel@iucs.cs.indiana.edu writes: > > >Re: Coral Lisp > > There is a review of Coral CommonLisp, ObjectLogo and >MacScheme+Toolsmith in the most recent MacUser magazine. (See >the article about Expert Systems.) > The reviewer (if I recall correctly; maybe Ollie has >read it too and can correct me) claims that the Coral product >is not a full Common Lisp. No no no! The not-really CommonLisp in the review was ExperCommonLisp, from Expertelligence. I have considered Expertelligence to be a bad joke ever since suffering through an endless stream of unusable versions of ExperLogo, all labeled "Version 1.1", that they sent me over a span of months. I am hopeful that Coral Common Lisp, due out "real soon now", will be for real. -- Paul Perkins Disclaimer: I don't even know anybody at Coral Software.
willc@tekchips.TEK.COM (Will Clinger) (07/25/87)
In article <119200003@iucs> kitchel@iucs.cs.indiana.edu writes: > There is a review of Coral CommonLisp, ObjectLogo and >MacScheme+Toolsmith in the most recent MacUser magazine. No, the review was of ExperCommon Lisp (from Expertelligence), Object Logo (from Coral Software), and MacScheme+Toolsmith (from Semantic Microsystems). > The reviewer (if I recall correctly; maybe Ollie has >read it too and can correct me) claims that the Coral product >is not a full Common Lisp. This, of course, is not surprising. ExperCommon Lisp is not full Common Lisp and differs from Common Lisp in many important respects. I have heard from people I trust that Coral's product is real Common Lisp, with all of Common Lisp's strengths and weaknesses. >MacScheme comes off quite well in the review. It gives you >everything that is claimed for it and more than you probably >would expect, i.e. a nicer interface into the toolbox. The reviewer's main complaints about MacScheme+Toolsmith were that its interpreted code was slightly slower than the other two products' native code and that there was no way to construct double-clickable applications using it. Both complaints are answered by Version 1.0, which includes a high quality incremental native code compiler and an Application Builder that allows double-clickable applications to be created easily and distributed without royalties. Version 1.0 will be introduced at the MacWorld Expo in a few weeks. The version reviewed was one of Version 0.8, 0.81, or 0.82. Though this was a preliminary version, whose owners are entitled to free upgrades to Version 1.0, it still received "five mice" from MacUser. > Sid Kitchel > Computer Science Dept. > Indiana University Peace, William Clinger formerly of the computer science department at Indiana University, where he designed and constructed the system that became MacScheme; with an acknowledged stake in the success of Semantic Microsystems, he is now employed by the Tektronix Computer Research Laboratory.
mdc@eddie.MIT.EDU (Martin Connor) (07/27/87)
[apologies if this is a duplicate.] In article <752@cadre.dsl.PITTSBURGH.EDU> you write: >In article <6646@dartvax.UUCP> waltervj@dartvax.UUCP (walter jeffries) writes: >>Anyone know anything about the new Coral Lisp for the Macintosh? > >I saw it demoed at AAAI. It looked good and cheap ($200 to Universities). >It is Franz CommonLisp implemented for the Mac II. It is a full >set. It compiles to native code. It has an emacs with goodies >like meta-point. It will be ready "real soon now". Coral Lisp is NOT an implementation of Franz. Franz did nothing at all for Coral, except lend their name to Coral's finished product. Coral recently released Coral Object Logo, which was written in Coral Lisp, long before Franz showed up on the scene. This is not meant to imply that the lisp is not good. It is *very* good, just that the credit for the lisp should not go to Franz. It should go to the hackers who worked for so little to make it good. Most of Coral Lisp is written in tight, fast assembler, and the compiler is especially fast. It will run on a 1Mb Mac{+,II,SE}. It has an object system, extensible emacs-like editor, and full toolbox access. Since it was used to do the Logo, and since it was developed on Macs, Prodigys and II's (and since I know the people who wrote it) it is pretty damn solid. Summary: This is a very good lisp, and I would certainly recommend it to anyone who wants a good CommonLisp for their Mac. They are within a couple weeks of shipping as of today. Franz may do marketing under some cutsie name. Get it because it's good and fast. Disclaimer: I used to work for Coral, and have friends there. I still call 'em as I see 'em.
waltervj@dartvax.UUCP (walter jeffries) (07/27/87)
In article <119200003@iucs> kitchel@iucs.cs.indiana.edu writes: > There is a review of Coral CommonLisp, ObjectLogo and >MacScheme+Toolsmith in the most recent MacUser magazine. (See >the article about Expert Systems.) > Yes, I saw that too... But, be careful, for they were reviewing ExperCommonLisp, NOT Coral Lisp. The reason I emphisize this is that I just received e-mail from a beta testor of Coral Lisp who says that it appears to be complete common lisp while ExperLisp has had a long history of problems and incompatibilities from what I've heard. Thanx for responding to my query, -Waltervj .
davis@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Arthur Davis x4675) (08/03/87)
As I understand it, Coral Lisp is a subset of Coral's Common Lisp, which was co-developed with Franz Inc. and is called something like Allegra. Coral is to sell for $100 and Allegra for $400. Both are native code compiler based, but only Allegra can create standalone executables. Coral Lisp is much like Coral Object Logo in its object-oriented high-level Mac toolbox capabilities. Allegra is somewhat geared for the Mac II, though it will run on a Plus (slowly). My information source, by the way, is a phone call to Coral. Both products are supposed to ship in early September.
sterritt@ge-mc3i.UUCP (Chris Sterritt) (08/04/87)
In article <881@bdmrrr.bdm.com> davis@bdmrrr.bdm.com (Arthur Davis x4675) writes: > [...] >Coral is to sell for $100 and Allegra for $400. Both are native code > [...] Oh PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE make it inexpensive!!!!! If *any* of you know people at Coral, let them know that inexpensive is MUCH better! Just tell them they'll get *so* many more orders if it's inexpensive. It's true... lookit how many LS & Turbo Pascals have sold at less than $100 (thru the mail).