two co-existing projects

[Reginald S. Perry]

>"Marcus" == Marcus G Daniels <marcus@cathcart.sysc.pdx.edu> writes:


>>>>> "MM" == Mike McDonald <mikemac@titian.engr.sgi.com> writes:
MM> There's plenty to do before we need to muck with the lisp
MM> compiler. Eventually, we'd probably want to transition to a
MM> completely free implementation like CMU-CL.

> More people behind one free compiler means less bugs in that
> compiler, and a slowing growing pool of people able to fix bugs in
> the compiler.

I agree with this. CMU-CL has only one major shortcoming, no
threads/lightweight processes. The fact that the whole code tree is
available offsets that. If Allegro or Harlequin wants to hand us their
code base, I am all for using one of those. :-)

Otherwise its easier in the long term to use CMU-CL now and make it
what we want it to be. I'm sure that all the CMU-CL hackers would be
behind this if done correctly.


-Reggie