Newsgroups: comp.lang.dylan,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.java
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!news.dfci.harvard.edu!camelot.ccs.neu.edu!chaos.dac.neu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watserv3.uwaterloo.ca!undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca!clgonsal
From: clgonsal@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Carl Laurence Gonsalves)
Subject: Re: GC, Java, etc.
Sender: news@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (news spool owner)
Message-ID: <DGo5A6.Myo@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 23:58:54 GMT
References: <LUDEMANN.95Oct6140930@expernet26.expernet.com> <45ltru$osk@camelot.ccs.neu.edu> <DGGpDx.IGE@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <activisDGJr2B.4Ex@netcom.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: cayley.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Lines: 54
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.dylan:5481 comp.lang.lisp:19594 comp.lang.java:2072

In article <activisDGJr2B.4Ex@netcom.com>,
ActiVision <activis@netcom.com> wrote:
>Carl Laurence Gonsalves (clgonsal@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
>: Unless you mean Scheme, I never mentioned Lisp. Every Scheme (and Lisp)
>: that I've ever used were interpreted though. I know Lisp and Scheme
>: compilers are available, but I've never actually seen one.
>
>I find this almost impossible to credit, as it's been a good decade or more
>since I've seen a Scheme or Common Lisp that _didn't_ include a compiler!
>
>Please name a platform that you wish to use, and I'll name a Scheme compiler
>for it, if that would be helpful.  Alternatively, you can browse the Scheme
>Repository, I believe at http://www.cs.indiana.edu/pub/scheme-repository/,
>yourself.

Okay, tell me where I can get a Scheme compiler for the Amiga. :-)

But actually, I never said that "there aren't any Scheme or Lisp
compilers". In fact, I acknowledged their existence. I even read a paper on
Scheme->C. So I know they exist. I just haven't seen one.

The Scheme interpreter I used the most was called "scm". I can't find any
man-pages for it, but it looks like it's interpreted to me. It might be
doing "incremental compiles" but the outward appearance is that of an
interpreter. It's interactive and slow.

The Lisp that I use isn't CommonLisp. It's actually AutoLISP (the Lisp
interpreter built into AutoCAD). I was developing some small CAD
applications in AutoLisp. As far as I know there is no compiled AutoLISP
compiler, but I haven't really bothered to check. Interpreted Lisp was fast
enough for my purposes.

The fact that I haven't actually used or seen a Scheme or Lisp compiler is
probably dirrectly related to the fact that I don't do a lot in Scheme or
Lisp, and I don't really worry myself by looking for Scheme and/or Lisp
compilers. I personally don't like the parenthesized syntax of Lisp that
much, and I find it takes me a lot longer to develop in Lisp or Scheme
because I have to do a mental conversion. I'm certainly not saying that
parenthesized syntax is inferior. I just don't particularly enjoy
programming in a language like that. It's about as easy as hand coding
PostScript I find.

Perhaps there is a similar language (like maybe Dylan, I haven't looked at
it yet) that I would find prefferable, but Scheme and Lisp aren't my
favorite languages. So I hope that helps you understand why I haven't
seen Scheme or Lisp compilers: I haven't really gone loooking for them.

I don't think there is an AutoLISP compiler.

-- 
        Carl Laurence Gonsalves - clgonsal@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca
                   Computer Science, University of Waterloo
               http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~clgonsal/
                   http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~clgonsal/
