Nicolas Neuss <Nicolas.Neuss@iwr.uni-heidelberg.de> writes:
I would have preferred the option of LEP being supported by the free Lisp implementations (CMUCL, SBCL, CLISP, GCL).
David Lichteblau is working on this for SBCL. He shares code with SLIME, since Dan is factoring all the SBCL-deep-magic code into the SB-INTROSPECT library that we both use.
His LEP-for-SBCL is at http://www.lichteblau.com/src.html
Is LEP too complicated or otherwise bad, so that SLIME became necessary?
Absolutely not.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was any sharing going on between the SLIME and ELI-SBCL efforts. Since you are obviously talking to each other and aware of what the other is doing, how do you see the two efforts evolving? Do you think they will continue to be two separate efforts? If so, what segment of the SBCL developer community do you feel would gravitate towards SLIME as opposed to ELI-SBCL and why? In other words, why would an SBCL developer prefer SLIME over ELI-SBCL (or vice versa)? Cheers, Bill __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/