Re[2]: two co-existing projects

[bao.ha@srs.gov]

>>>   Well, I guess I'm in the third camp that wants a native PC based
>>> system that's tailored to run LISP, not Smalltalk, not ML, not JAVA.
>>> If someone wants to write emulators for those things in Lisp,
>>> fine. I believe that yet another universal VM is neither a relevant
>>> nor useful goal.

I am in this camp also.

>   I view Linux in the same light as Symbolics fans view the FEP. It's
> a necessary piece but not very exciting. (The FEP had such things as
> basic disk partitioning commands, hardware initialization, and booting
> of the lisp image. A linux based FEP would have things like fdisk and

I view Linux in the same light as Symbolics MacIvory fans view the MacIntosh.

MacIvory communicates with the MacIntosh via an RPC mechanism for low-level I/O
services.  LispOS can certainly communicate with the host OS, Linux, via a more
efficient low-level I/O services.  I would like to login to my Linux machine,
start a Genera-like process, and get my X-Windows Genera-like screen.  Maybe not
everything has to be Genera-like, but at least all of the functionality that my
6-year-old MacIvory 3 technology has been provided.

I do want the ability to produce a Linux-native Lisp applications, which can
then be cross-compiled to other platforms, including Windows 95/NT, MCL, ... 
Compiled compact native code is very important for the survival of Lisp.

Bao 
_______________________________________________________________________________