i have never programmed lisp before in my life, so i have no idea what's really going on here, but i plan on learning it over the next 6 months or so. what i need is a LISP compiler so that i can get started. I'm looking into Harlequin LispWorks 4.1 Professional. I've downloaded the Personal Edition (which is available free for download at their website) but i have no idea how to get a simple program up and running. Can someone tell me exactly what i need to do and exactly what code to type just to write an extremely simple program (the LISP equivalent of the typical C "Hello World" perhaps?) that prints something on the screen, just so that i can see some results and know that I'm actually on the right track? I have no idea how to use LispWorks, and no idea about the language itself, so if someone could just hold my hand and treat me like a complete moron i'd really appreciate it. :-) Thanks for any help.
by the way, i don't need the code explained to me, i'll learn all of that soon enough, i just want to see something happen before I go shell out money on this product. Thanks
Zachary Turner wrote in message <741sh7$lj...@uuneo.neosoft.com>... >i have never programmed lisp before in my life, so i have no idea what's >really going on here, but i plan on learning it over the next 6 months or >so. what i need is a LISP compiler so that i can get started. I'm looking >into Harlequin LispWorks 4.1 Professional. I've downloaded the Personal >Edition (which is available free for download at their website) but i have >no idea how to get a simple program up and running. Can someone tell me >exactly what i need to do and exactly what code to type just to write an >extremely simple program (the LISP equivalent of the typical C "Hello World" >perhaps?) that prints something on the screen, just so that i can see some >results and know that I'm actually on the right track? I have no idea how >to use LispWorks, and no idea about the language itself, so if someone could >just hold my hand and treat me like a complete moron i'd really appreciate >it. :-) Thanks for any help.
"Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> writes: > by the way, i don't need the code explained to me, i'll learn all of that > soon enough, i just want to see something happen before I go shell out money > on this product. Thanks
> Zachary Turner
> Zachary Turner wrote in message <741sh7$lj...@uuneo.neosoft.com>... > >i have never programmed lisp before in my life, so i have no idea what's > >really going on here, but i plan on learning it over the next 6 months or > >so. what i need is a LISP compiler so that i can get started. I'm looking > >into Harlequin LispWorks 4.1 Professional. I've downloaded the Personal > >Edition (which is available free for download at their website) but i have > >no idea how to get a simple program up and running. Can someone tell me > >exactly what i need to do and exactly what code to type just to write an > >extremely simple program (the LISP equivalent of the typical C "Hello > World" > >perhaps?) that prints something on the screen, just so that i can see some > >results and know that I'm actually on the right track? I have no idea how > >to use LispWorks, and no idea about the language itself, so if someone > could > >just hold my hand and treat me like a complete moron i'd really appreciate > >it. :-) Thanks for any help.
well, i took a brief look at it, and not much help. i dont' really want a tutorial right now, i just want someone to give me enough code that i can just cut and paste into the window of LispWorks and then tell me what to do to execute the program so that i can see some type of output on the screen. i'm not going to start trying to learn lisp until later, right now i just want to see something on my screen. if you could just post an _entire_ hello world program and tell me what to do in LispWorks to get it to run, i'd really appreciate it.
In article <19981201224608.08315.00000...@ng146.aol.com> ,
toolshe...@aol.com (Toolshed37) wrote: >well, i took a brief look at it, and not much help. i dont' really want a >tutorial right now, i just want someone to give me enough code that i can just >cut and paste into the window of LispWorks and then tell me what to do to >execute the program so that i can see some type of output on the screen. i'm >not going to start trying to learn lisp until later, right now i just want to >see something on my screen. if you could just post an _entire_ hello world >program and tell me what to do in LispWorks to get it to run, i'd really >appreciate it.
Well, define what you mean by a hello world program... Here are several that meet your requirements.
Because strings are self-evaluating in Lisp, this is the the simplest program: "Hello, world!"
If you want to get closer to the canonical hello world program that does explicit output, try these: (write "Hello, world!") (format t "Hello, world!") (format nil "Hello, world!")
If you want to pop up a window that says hello world, that kind of output is platform dependent (and I don't have a copy of LW at hand). Typically, you can create a window that behaves as a text output stream, and use it something like this: (let ((w (make-instance 'window))) (format w "Hello, world!")) Again, the window example may not work in LW (if it does, it's a lucky guess on the class name). Why don't you take a look through the manual and see whether they have a tutorial?
Finally, if you want to create a standalone application, you're really gonna have to crack that manual. Every Lisp is different, but it would probably be fruitful if you searched the index for some hyphenated combination of dump or save and image or application.
Any of these expressions at the command prompt will do what you want to, and yet none of these is satisfying as a program.
If you want to write a function that simply does hello world, then
(defun foo () (princ "Hello World"))
(foo)
This to me does not quite seem very satisfying as a program either.
I guess what I am trying to say is that Lisp is not very amenable to small toy programs, simply because they are trivial to put together. Now, if you want to deal with a large complex problem, Lisp tends to work great. There are many, many problems that take loads of code in other languages, but end relatively clean and nice in Lisp. An expressive syntax helps :-)
Going up yet another level, the "right way" to learn a language would be to figure out what it is good for. Obviously, Lisp is not good for writing Hello World, since you end up carrying around an environment at least 10MB in size to get this to work. I don't know what your motives for learning lisp are, but I would think hard about this question.
Now, if you want to ask what lisp is good for, I would suggest trekking over to dejanews. This question has been asked enough times. If you have a problem at hand, there are lots of *very* smart people on this newsgroup that would be more than happy to help you out. (They've been kind to me, certainly.)
toolshe...@aol.com (Toolshed37) writes: > well, i took a brief look at it, and not much help. i dont' really want a > tutorial right now, i just want someone to give me enough code that i can just > cut and paste into the window of LispWorks and then tell me what to do to > execute the program so that i can see some type of output on the screen. i'm > not going to start trying to learn lisp until later, right now i just want to > see something on my screen. if you could just post an _entire_ hello world > program and tell me what to do in LispWorks to get it to run, i'd really > appreciate it.
Sunil Mishra wrote in message ... >Going up yet another level, the "right way" to learn a language would be to >figure out what it is good for. Obviously, Lisp is not good for writing >Hello World, since you end up carrying around an environment at least 10MB >in size to get this to work. I don't know what your motives for learning >lisp are, but I would think hard about this question.
>Now, if you want to ask what lisp is good for, I would suggest trekking >over to dejanews. This question has been asked enough times. If you have a >problem at hand, there are lots of *very* smart people on this newsgroup >that would be more than happy to help you out. (They've been kind to me, >certainly.)
Oh, I have very valid motives for learning LISP. I'm a university student and in the Spring I'm doing an independent study course on Artificial Intelligence, for which I've decided to learn LISP, since it is perfectly suited for doing AI programming. I also realize that it is not explicitly for AI, but that it does suit the problem perfectly. I was able to get something to run with the help of all the posts, thanks to everyone who posted. I'll probably go shell out some $$ for LispWorks now, I like the fact that you can write in LISP and deliver it as a .DLL, which you can link to in C++ :-)
> Oh, I have very valid motives for learning LISP. I'm a university > student... I'll probably go shell out some $$ for LispWorks now...
If you just want to learn Lisp then why are you so keen on spending a large sum of money? Last time I looked, both Harlequin and Franz had full-featured versions of their Lisp environments free for personal use. And there are a whole bunch of Lisp implementations that are free software, in case you ever wanted to look at the inside :-)
I'm spoiled I guess? I've been writing games in C/C++ using DirectX and OpenGL for some time now and it'd be nice if, after I get good with Lisp, I could write all my AI code in LISP, compile it to a DLL, and dynamically link to the DLL in my games, which will be written in C/C++.
Joachim Achtzehnter wrote in message ... >"Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> writes:
>> Oh, I have very valid motives for learning LISP. I'm a university >> student... I'll probably go shell out some $$ for LispWorks now...
>If you just want to learn Lisp then why are you so keen on spending a >large sum of money? Last time I looked, both Harlequin and Franz had >full-featured versions of their Lisp environments free for personal >use. And there are a whole bunch of Lisp implementations that are free >software, in case you ever wanted to look at the inside :-)
I suspect doing things the other way around - writing your games in lisp, and using C/C++ routines for specific functions - will work out better. But then that's just a guess. I'm only familiar with Harlequin Lispworks, and I know they have an interface for automatically reading header files and constructing an interface to C. So, as long as you have the header files, constructing an OpenGL interface *ought* to be straightforward. (I haven't done this, so I can't be certain.)
"Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> writes: > I'm spoiled I guess? I've been writing games in C/C++ using DirectX and > OpenGL > for some time now and it'd be nice if, after I get good with Lisp, I could > write all > my AI code in LISP, compile it to a DLL, and dynamically link to the DLL in > my > games, which will be written in C/C++.
> Joachim Achtzehnter wrote in message ... > >"Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> writes:
> >> Oh, I have very valid motives for learning LISP. I'm a university > >> student... I'll probably go shell out some $$ for LispWorks now...
> >If you just want to learn Lisp then why are you so keen on spending a > >large sum of money? Last time I looked, both Harlequin and Franz had > >full-featured versions of their Lisp environments free for personal > >use. And there are a whole bunch of Lisp implementations that are free > >software, in case you ever wanted to look at the inside :-)
I'm not sure how practical that would be. All graphics, sound, input, and network programming I typically do in C++ so it wouldn't make much sense to write the whole program in Lisp and link in all code relating to graphics, sound, input, and network programming when I could write it in C++ and link in only the AI stuff. One thing that's just come to my attention though: How do you prototype a Lisp function in C? From what I've learned of Lisp so far (not very much at all) it isn't typed at all. The list (1 2 3 (foo bar 37)) is quite different in memory size from the list (1). So I guess the two main things that you would need to know how to declare in C are an atom and a list, taking into consideration that a list can contain other lists. Has anyone had any experience doing this?
Sunil Mishra wrote in message ... >I suspect doing things the other way around - writing your games in lisp, >and using C/C++ routines for specific functions - will work out better. But >then that's just a guess. I'm only familiar with Harlequin Lispworks, and I >know they have an interface for automatically reading header files and >constructing an interface to C. So, as long as you have the header files, >constructing an OpenGL interface *ought* to be straightforward. (I haven't >done this, so I can't be certain.)
>> I'm spoiled I guess? I've been writing games in C/C++ using DirectX and >> OpenGL >> for some time now and it'd be nice if, after I get good with Lisp, I could >> write all >> my AI code in LISP, compile it to a DLL, and dynamically link to the DLL in >> my >> games, which will be written in C/C++.
>> Joachim Achtzehnter wrote in message ... >> >"Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> writes:
>> >> Oh, I have very valid motives for learning LISP. I'm a university >> >> student... I'll probably go shell out some $$ for LispWorks now...
>> >If you just want to learn Lisp then why are you so keen on spending a >> >large sum of money? Last time I looked, both Harlequin and Franz had >> >full-featured versions of their Lisp environments free for personal >> >use. And there are a whole bunch of Lisp implementations that are free >> >software, in case you ever wanted to look at the inside :-)
On second thought maybe this isn't such a bad idea.. Interesting at the least... I'll give it a shot in a few months after I get proficient with Lisp. On another note, does anyone know what the deal is with Franz, Inc.? I've been trying to get in touch with these people for the last few weeks and they don't return emails and when I call they say that the lady who handles sales "is not currently in the office and wont' be in for the remainder of the day." That's happened twice now and the email thing has happened twice also. I evaluated Allegro CL 5.0 and I really like it, but these people are basically sitting here with the "No we don't your money. Go give it to Harelquin" attitude, which is really frustrating since I want to purchase Allegro. Has anyone else had better luck with them?
Sunil Mishra wrote in message ... >I suspect doing things the other way around - writing your games in lisp, >and using C/C++ routines for specific functions - will work out better. But >then that's just a guess. I'm only familiar with Harlequin Lispworks, and I >know they have an interface for automatically reading header files and >constructing an interface to C. So, as long as you have the header files, >constructing an OpenGL interface *ought* to be straightforward. (I haven't >done this, so I can't be certain.)
>> I'm spoiled I guess? I've been writing games in C/C++ using DirectX and >> OpenGL >> for some time now and it'd be nice if, after I get good with Lisp, I could >> write all >> my AI code in LISP, compile it to a DLL, and dynamically link to the DLL in >> my >> games, which will be written in C/C++.
>> Joachim Achtzehnter wrote in message ... >> >"Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> writes:
>> >> Oh, I have very valid motives for learning LISP. I'm a university >> >> student... I'll probably go shell out some $$ for LispWorks now...
>> >If you just want to learn Lisp then why are you so keen on spending a >> >large sum of money? Last time I looked, both Harlequin and Franz had >> >full-featured versions of their Lisp environments free for personal >> >use. And there are a whole bunch of Lisp implementations that are free >> >software, in case you ever wanted to look at the inside :-)
Zachary Turner wrote in message <746dv0$qi...@uuneo.neosoft.com>... >On second thought maybe this isn't such a bad idea.. Interesting at the >least... I'll give it a shot in a few months after I get proficient with >Lisp. On another note, does anyone know what the deal is with Franz, Inc.?
* Zachary Turner wrote: > On second thought maybe this isn't such a bad idea.. Interesting at the > least... I'll give it a shot in a few months after I get proficient with > Lisp. On another note, does anyone know what the deal is with Franz, Inc.? > I've been trying to get in touch with these people for the last few weeks > and they don't return emails and when I call they say that the lady who > handles sales "is not currently in the office and wont' be in for the > remainder of the day."
They've probably been very busy organising a conference (very well, I thought).
Corman Lisp is betaware. I recommend that if you have the money for real commercial grade software that you stick with Franz or Harlequin. They have been battle tested, implement the ANSI standards, and you will experience far fewer fustrations with them. My experience with Corman Lisp involved frequent crashes, missing features (like macrolet), and far slower performance. And all I tried on Corman Lisp were a few small benchmarks. I hate to be negative but you can't really expect a new Lisp environment to be competitive with folks with a large staff and years behind their product? For a beginner on Windows I recommend Harlequin Lispworks Personal Edition and when you get a real project graduate to the Professional Edition (~$500) which costs only a few hundred more than what Corman wants. If you need even more performance (and have even more dollars) then consider Franz's Allegro CL(~$3000-4000). (I have both and prefer ACL over Lispworks but I am biased by having used ACL on Unix for years and the need for the absolute fastest floating point speed.)
-- John Watton Aluminum Company of America
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Zachary Turner <ztur...@elsitech.com> wrote: >>> I'm spoiled I guess? I've been writing games in C/C++ using DirectX and >>> OpenGL >>> for some time now and it'd be nice if, after I get good with Lisp, I >could >>> write all >>> my AI code in LISP, compile it to a DLL, and dynamically link to the DLL >in >>> my >>> games, which will be written in C/C++.
* "Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> | On another note, does anyone know what the deal is with Franz, Inc.?
well, yes, I do. it appears that you walked into a small restaurant with Burger King expectations. in so doing, you might have triggered some strong negative responses based solely in a cultural conflict that you might not even be aware of. phone numbers and e-mail addresses look very much alike, in contrast to storefronts, offices, and counters.
you said you know nothing about (Common) Lisp -- one of the things you will experience is that the community is very different from the Windows communities, whence it appears you come. for instance, the Common Lisp market is not marketing-driven, it is not a pyramid game that requires ever new people nor a bug-and-upgrade scam, and it is not leveraging its operational costs across a huge volume of sales. rather, it is a pretty mature market of long-term partnerships with a steady growth. the quick sale is not unlike a one-night-stand in this setting and you _may_ just have appeared much less than serious than you believed you were.
| I evaluated Allegro CL 5.0 and I really like it, but these people are | basically sitting here with the "No we don't your money. Go give it to | Harelquin" attitude, which is really frustrating since I want to purchase | Allegro. Has anyone else had better luck with them?
yes, I have. the fact that I have happy Common Lisp clients today is probably due mostly to the excellent and welcoming attitude at Franz Inc when I first approached them. they have continued to be very helpful in making my projects succeed, both for me and for my clients. I think what you write is grossly unfair, so I have to reiterate my impression that you have stumbled on a cultural conflict; not all restaurants serve fast food, some cater to a very different audience and their tastes and needs.
#:Erik -- The Microsoft Dating Program -- where do you want to crash tonight?
In article <3121816954816...@naggum.no>, Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> wrote:
> * "Zachary Turner" <ztur...@elsitech.com> > | I evaluated Allegro CL 5.0 and I really like it, but these people are > | basically sitting here with the "No we don't your money. Go give it to > | Harelquin" attitude, which is really frustrating since I want to purchase > | Allegro. Has anyone else had better luck with them?
> yes, I have. the fact that I have happy Common Lisp clients today is > probably due mostly to the excellent and welcoming attitude at Franz Inc > when I first approached them. they have continued to be very helpful in > making my projects succeed, both for me and for my clients.
I can add that I have had a totally different (from Zachary's) experience in communicating with Franz, in spite of never even having been their paying customer. Virtually every e-mail inquiry sent to the sales (out of curiosity, to keep an eye on the situation in case I do get a chance to become a paying customer), as well as ordering of ACL 4.3 for Linux, was followed up by a phone call from them. I have no idea what was the secret of "looking serious", but I have always had an impression they indeed have a very enthusiastic and welcoming attitude.
john.wat...@alcoa.com wrote: > Corman Lisp is betaware. I recommend that if you have the money for > real commercial grade software that you stick with Franz or > Harlequin. They have been battle tested, implement the ANSI standards, > and you will experience far fewer fustrations with them. My experience > with Corman Lisp involved frequent crashes, missing features (like > macrolet), and far slower performance.
Very true. But I do believe Corman Lisp has its place in the sun, together with all the big commercial and non-commercial players, because it scratches some itches other implementations do not.
> I hate to be negative but you can't > really expect a new Lisp environment to be competitive with folks with > a large staff and years behind their product?
Perhaps because there does not have to be a competition. You obviously speak from the viewpoint of a corporate developer who has the money and expects return of investment. This is great, but what about the hobbyists? The "Personal" and "Lite" editions of LWW and ACLW are very different from Corman Lisp, and not always to their advantage. First thing, they are crippled, second, you don't have the source, third, you are not allowed to redistribute them as parts of your application.
> For a beginner on > Windows I recommend Harlequin Lispworks Personal Edition and when you > get a real project graduate to the Professional Edition (~$500) which > costs only a few hundred more than what Corman wants.
What is better, open-source betaware or black box crippleware? Before answering, it is important to consider what for.
For a beginner, LWW Personal or ACLW Lite are indeed the best choice.
But, there is not necessarily a graduation with getting a real Lisp project. One may have Lisp-unrelated projects in real life they are perfectly happy about, or unable to change for the time being. So what do you use if you want something that is not crippled, is still free or very low cost, allows you to let others see and use your work as an application, and allows you to see what is inside so that you can add what is missing or fix what is broken? None of the free versions of the big commercial players fit the description.
As for "what Corman wants", you seem to have misread the license conditions. Roger does not want anything for the compiler and the runtime system. Corman Lisp is free, and that is uncrippled version with the right to non-commercially distribute binary applications which may include the compiler. None of the free versions of the commercial stuff in Windows come close to this. Add to that full source code, and there is some weight to compare.
Now, on the technical side, Corman Lisp has a very interesting balance between low-level and high-level stuff. You can do everything a C programmer can. This was the reason I said the original poster may be interested in Corman Lisp, since there was some talk about polygon pushing and game programming. The FFI in Corman Lisp is very flexible and transparent. The assembly-level stuff is fully open, to the point that one can write inline assembly code in Lisp functions. It is, essentially, Lisp with all the capabilities of C when it comes to communicating with the outside world.
So, my take on this (besides that I don't think Lisp community should (or, even, can afford to) kick the underdog) is yes, Corman Lisp is worse compared to the entrenched big commercial players, but it just might happen to be the kind of worse that is better here and there...
--Vassili
P.S. BTW, Roger Corman will soon release an update with improved thread stability (those crashes are due to Windows thread implementation "features"), macrolet, and the full source--Lisp and C, among some other things.
> As for "what Corman wants", you seem to have misread the license > conditions. Roger does not want anything for the compiler and the > runtime system. Corman Lisp is free, and that is uncrippled version > with the right to non-commercially distribute binary applications > which may include the compiler. None of the free versions of the > commercial stuff in Windows come close to this. Add to that full > source code, and there is some weight to compare.
"Free" nowadays often seems to be:
- you are free to fix the bugs you never wanted to fix. - you are free to implement the functionality you never wanted to program yourself - you are free to wade through large amounts of complicated source code you never wanted to look at
Some people seem to really underestimate the massive amount of work that is needed to write a really usable and balanced system. This week I checked a small piece of code (two pages) in five Lisp systems. a) one *free* versions I checked was not able to run it (a class fixnum?) without modifications b) for the two free systems I gave up waiting for the result (P266 and SUN E250). My old MacIvory beats them. Ha!
So, people don't get your expectations to high and never underestimate the work that is needed to develop a Lisp system. I said it some time ago, I have ***high*** respect for guys like Roger Corman who are trying to tame the beast.
jos...@lavielle.com (Rainer Joswig) writes: > Some people seem to really underestimate the massive amount of work > that is needed to write a really usable and balanced system. This > week I checked a small piece of code (two pages) in five Lisp systems. > a) one *free* versions I checked was not able to run it > (a class fixnum?) without modifications
While the ANSI Standard does not mandate that the type specifier FIXNUM have a corresponding class (unlike INTEGER), it does IMHO allow implementations to define classes for other type specifiers (Section 4.3.7):
"Individual implementations may be extended to define other type specifiers to have a corresponding class."
CMU CL does define a class for FIXNUM.
> b) for the two free systems I gave up waiting for the result > (P266 and SUN E250). My old MacIvory beats them. Ha!
If you could give me access to the source code, IŽd be very interested in looking into performance issues in CMU CL on Intel, so that the quality of implementation increases for one of the free systems out there ;)
> So, people don't get your expectations to high and never underestimate > the work that is needed to develop a Lisp system. I said it some
In article <74d0hq$it...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Vassili Bykov <vass...@objectpeople.com> wrote:
> > As for "what Corman wants", you seem to have misread the license > conditions. Roger does not want anything for the compiler and the > runtime system. Corman Lisp is free
He wants $300 for the development environment if memory serves me. The rest is "free".
I want to correct something else I said earlier. Allegro CL Professional is something like $4000 which gives you the ability to distribute runtime internal to a corporation (external to corporation Franz wants to negotiate a cut). There is an Allegro Personal which is in the $500-900 range but no runtime ability which I had not mentioned.
-- John Watton Aluminum Company of America
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
In article <87soetm4mn....@orion.dent.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de>, Pierre Mai
<p...@acm.org> wrote: > > b) for the two free systems I gave up waiting for the result > > (P266 and SUN E250). My old MacIvory beats them. Ha!
> If you could give me access to the source code, I=B4d be very interested > in looking into performance issues in CMU CL on Intel, so that the > quality of implementation increases for one of the free systems out > there ;)
Nothing special. Just using generic functions instead of ordinary functions. Calling methods seems to have a huge overhead (also conses like hell) in CMU CL. The version without methods ran as expected. I tried this test only once on my MacIvory and actually methods were faster (!) - on other implementations there was a 15% speed penalty using methods.
In article <87soetm4mn....@orion.dent.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de>, Pierre Mai
<p...@acm.org> wrote: > While the ANSI Standard does not mandate that the type specifier > FIXNUM have a corresponding class (unlike INTEGER), it does IMHO > allow implementations to define classes for other type specifiers > (Section 4.3.7):
> "Individual implementations may be extended to define other type > specifiers to have a corresponding class."
In article <74eois$u5...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, john.wat...@alcoa.com wrote: > In article <74d0hq$it...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > Vassili Bykov <vass...@objectpeople.com> wrote:
> > > As for "what Corman wants", you seem to have misread the license > > conditions. Roger does not want anything for the compiler and the > > runtime system. Corman Lisp is free
> He wants $300 for the development environment if memory serves me. The rest is > "free".
> I want to correct something else I said earlier. Allegro CL Professional is > something like $4000 which gives you the ability to distribute runtime > internal to a corporation (external to corporation Franz wants to negotiate a > cut). There is an Allegro Personal which is in the $500-900 range but no > runtime ability which I had not mentioned.
So it seems that LispWorks for Windows is much cheaper?
