On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:59 AM, John Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have always felt guilty about wanting Common LISP on Plan 9; but I > am not entirely sure why. > John > Eh, there's lots of code for Common Lisp out there that'd be nice to run on Plan 9 in my opinion. I don't think we're alone in our feelings :-). A lot of time Unix and Lisp have seem a bit at odds... I think there's been papers written on the topic even. Dave > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> The question is what new function Plan 9, as an OS, defines for > >> the end user. > >> Plan 9 is not for end users. Plan 9 is for programmers. > > > > I think I just heard the sound of a nail being struck on the head. > > > > I do find myself wanting Lisp, Scheme, and Haskell and all my other weird > > programming toys for Plan 9 too. I believe Haskell and Scheme are > handled, > > but has there ever been a Common Lisp implementation for it? Perhaps I > > should look into a port of SBCL or something. > > Dave > >> > >> -rob > >> > > > > > >
