Re: [Ilisp-devel] SLIME

> Nicolas Neuss <[email protected]>
writes:

>> I would have preferred the option of LEP being
supported by the free Lisp
>> implementations (CMUCL, SBCL, CLISP, GCL). 

> David Lichteblau is working on this for SBCL. He
shares code with
> SLIME, since Dan is factoring all the
SBCL-deep-magic code into the
> SB-INTROSPECT library that we both use.

> His LEP-for-SBCL is at
http://www.lichteblau.com/src.html

>> Is LEP too complicated or otherwise bad, so that
SLIME became
>> necessary?

>Absolutely not.

Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was any sharing
going on between the SLIME and ELI-SBCL efforts. Since
you are obviously talking to each other and aware of
what the other is doing, how do you see the two
efforts evolving? Do you think they will continue to
be two separate efforts? If so, what segment of the
SBCL developer community do you feel would gravitate
towards SLIME as opposed to ELI-SBCL and why? In other
words, why would an SBCL developer prefer SLIME over
ELI-SBCL (or vice versa)?

Cheers,
Bill

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

_______________________________________________
slime-devel site list
[email protected]
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/slime-devel