On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 09:24 +0300, Volkan YAZICI wrote: > "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Someone at the PostgreSQL West conference last weekend expressed an > > interest in a Lisp procedural language. The only two Lisp environments > > I've found so far that aren't GPL are Steel Bank Common Lisp (MIT, > > http://sbcl.sourceforge.net) and XLispStat (BSD, > > http://www.stat.uiowa.edu/~luke/xls/xlsinfo/xlsinfo.html). SBCL is a > > very active project, but I'm not sure about XLispStat. > > You see PL/scheme[1]?
I don't remember who it was at the conference, but when I suggested Scheme, he said that it already existed, and that (Common) Lisp was really what was wanted. Scheme is a much simpler beast. Both Scheme and Common Lisp are similar in complexity at the core/"virtual machine"/interpreter/compiler level. But once you load on all the libraries, object models (CLOS), etc., Common Lisp is much bigger. -- M. Edward (Ed) Borasky ruby-perspectives.blogspot.com "A mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems." -- Alfréd Rényi via Paul Erdős -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
