Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.mathworks.com!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!fht-mannheim!roxi.rz.fht-mannheim.de!duz
From: duz@roxi.rz.fht-mannheim.de (Dirk Zoller)
Subject: Re: Why is Lisp not more widely used?
References: <40j8lv$l5j@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> <40ng4k$kg8@excalibur.edge.net> <activisDDB6I2.2xw@netcom.com> <808484603snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk> <40rhgg$679@excalibur.edge.net>
Sender: news@roxi.rz.fht-mannheim.de (NEWS - system account)
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik, Mannheim (FRG)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 20:04:01 CET
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Message-ID: <1995Aug16.200401.22854@roxi.rz.fht-mannheim.de>
Lines: 21

Blake McBride (blake@edge.net) wrote:
: GCC doesn't really support Windows 3.1, NT 3.x or '95.  It's just
: good for command line utilities.

Gcc works fine with Emacs. I don't miss much from Borland C when I use
emacs/gcc and I miss a lot from Emacs when I use Borland C. If you
dislike emacs, then it might be worthwile to have a look at xwpe, an
astonishing clone of the Borland Develompent environment for X11.

If you dislike Emacs but on the other hand you are so fit in Windows
that you easily would hack a GUI for clisp (if only that damn clisp
would compile with MS-C) then here's a suggestion:  As a sort of
warming up hack something like xwpe for Windows, then use that
combination to do that clisp port and GUI. Many people would be
grateful. Otherwise please consider becoming a little more realistic.

Apropos GUIs. Some Lisps/Schemes seem to use the Tk toolkit. Does
anybody know if clisp might go the same direction some day?

--
duz@roxi.rz.fht-mannheim.de <Dirk Zoller>
