Re: testing a new Clisp Windows installer
Raymond Toy <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.clisp.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>>>>> "Wolfgang" == Wolfgang Dautermann <[email protected]> writes: Wolfgang> On 2016-06-29 21:20, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote: >> See Joerg's answers. Wolfgang> Yes, thank you. I can change the text. Would the following be okay - and Wolfgang> correct? Wolfgang> ----------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang> Clisp Wolfgang> ----- Wolfgang> Clisp includes GNU readline support, so Maxima has advanced command-line Wolfgang> editing facilities when built with it. Readline is optional; I sometimes forget to enable it and compile clisp to include such support. (Or because I don't have the right libraries already installed or whatever.) Wolfgang> Clisp is compiled to bytecodes, so Maxima running on Clisp is Wolfgang> substantially slower than on Lisps compiled to machine instructions. My personal opinion: I wouldn't make such a blanket statement; it really depends on what you're doing. Number crunching is slow, yes, but I suspect clisp on symbolic stuff is pretty good. (The testsuite does a lot of numerics so it's not a great test.) For bignum work, clisp is as fast as or faster than other lisps that compile to native code. -- Ray ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Attend Shape: An AT&T Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT&T Park in San Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries present their vision of the future. This family event has something for everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today. http://sdm.link/attshape _______________________________________________ clisp-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clisp-devel