MIT 6.001

[Sam Steingold]

>>>> In message <Pine.OSF.3.93.981107234917.9389B-100000@saturn.math.uaa.alaska.edu>
>>>> On the subject of "Re: MIT 6.001"
>>>> Sent on Sat, 7 Nov 1998 23:58:06 -0900 (AKST)
>>>> Honorable "James A. Crippen" <crippenj@saturn.math.uaa.alaska.edu> writes:
 >> On 6 Nov 1998, Sam Steingold wrote:
 >> 
 >> >  >> Would basically give you the same thing -- or something close.  Now we need
 >> >  >> a basic Lisp shell.
 >> >
 >> > CLISP? (http://clisp.cons.org)
 >> 
 >> Even though it isn't lisp, the scheme shell scsh is probably to way to go.
 >> I've often thought of rewriting the init scripts in scsh to make a more
 >> lispish system, but the extent of the task has prevented me from
 >> undertaking it.
 >> 
 >> As a shell, scsh is pretty much unparalleled.  I can think of no other
 >> shells that have access to all of the POSIX system calls.  Its only
 >> detriment is that nobody has written a CLI interface for it.  IOW, there's
 >> no way to interact with it other than the old, difficult REPL.  If someone
 >> took the time to write linkage to the GNU readline library and to termcap
 >> then you'd have a shell that spoke scheme, had history, complex screen
 >> commands (such as making text windows and the like), and full access to
 >> all the major UNIX syscalls.  Someone wrote a web server in it, for
 >> example.  It's much more than just a shell scripting interpreter, except
 >> for its lacking a terse command set and having a good command line iface.

CLISP has all this (text windows, POSIX, readline, termcap etc), plus
full power of ANSI CL.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.goems.com/~sds) running RedHat5.1 GNU/Linux
Micros**t is not the answer.  Micros**t is a question, and the answer is Linux,
(http://www.linux.org) the choice of the GNU (http://www.gnu.org) generation.
A poet who reads his verse in public may have other nasty habits.