MuLisp

[hath...@clearwire.net]

I am an old user of Mulisp and actually have three versions of muLisp. Unfortunately, I seem to have lost or misplaced some of the files. I need the compiler, CLOS files, examples, lessions, closure, grapics, mouse.

Hopefully this is not illegal? Will consider buying a complete version. I would also consider buying a 32 bit version if it exists.

My email is hath...@clearwire.net

Thanks

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

hath...@clearwire.net writes:

> I am an old user of Mulisp and actually have three versions of muLisp.
> Unfortunately, I seem to have lost or misplaced some of the files. I
> need the compiler, CLOS files, examples, lessions, closure, grapics,
> mouse.
>
> Hopefully this is not illegal? Will consider buying a complete
> version. I would also consider buying a 32 bit version if it exists.

Would you consider upgrading from MS-DOS to GNU/Linux, and from muLisp to
Common Lisp?

Both GNU/Linux and most CL implementations are free and $free.

There are a few Linux distributions targetted to old PC computers
(small, quick enough to boot).


On the other hand, you could perhaps find $35 and buy a Raspberry Pi
which let your run a modern GNU/Linux seamlessly. Clozure CL and a few
other implementations run on it. Ok, you'll need a little more than $35
to have a running system. You can reuse your old monitor, but you'll
need a USB keyboard (and optionnally a US mouse), a SD card, a power
supply, and if you want to hook more devices, a powered USB HUB.
Usually nowadays people have all that lying around at home, but if
you're still using and old PC, I'd guess no, so that'll increase a
little the price of upgrading.

Raspberry Pi $35
a SD card ~ $10
a USB keyboard ~ $10
a USB mouse ~ $5 (optional)
a power supply ~ $10

You have the choice between buying a $70 video to VGA convertor to use
your old monitor, or just buy a $110 modern HDMI LCD monitor.

So it'll be between $140 and $180 plus port to get a complete modern
working computer system you can use with current software.



If not, old versions of GNU clisp can even be used directly on MS-DOS
(2.32 is the last that can).
http://compgroups.net/comp.lang.lisp/clisp-for-dos/698157
The problem is to find an old binary, the release is a source tarball:
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/clisp/release/2.32/
so you'd need an old Borland C compiler (which is now $free, but
seemingly hard to find too).

There was also a commercial CL implementation for MS-DOS, Corman CL.
But similarly, it'll be hard to locate a $free old binary. The current
version that's distributed for $free by Corman, is for MS-Windows.

For some "strange" reason, http://bitsavers.org hasn't started to collect
IBM-PC/MS-DOS era software. The fact is, most commercial software is
already lost.

--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.

[hath...@clearwire.net]

Thanks for the info. I use MuLisp on Windows Virtual PC under Windows 98 or 2000, all on 64 bit Windows 7. On 2000 MuLisp works better and looks bettter than it ever did on DOS. There are reasons to preserve old stuff besides history or nostalgia. The biggest is probably old work! It is easier to extend old work if you can still run it and use it in its original form.

I also have a virtual Red Hat Linux in case I need that. Oh, and also PC DOS and Microsoft DOS with Windows 3.1. I love the virtual PC, It is a way forward, not back.

Befor the virtual PC I used three old computers on a network with a KVM switch to accomplish what I do now with the Virtual PC.

Thanks






dOS

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

hath...@clearwire.net writes:

> Thanks for the info. I use MuLisp on Windows Virtual PC under Windows
> 98 or 2000, all on 64 bit Windows 7. On 2000 MuLisp works better and
> looks bettter than it ever did on DOS.

Ah, good.

> There are reasons to preserve old stuff besides history or nostalgia.
> The biggest is probably old work! It is easier to extend old work if
> you can still run it and use it in its original form.

I totally agree.

However, you can benefit from the fact that Common Lisp is COMMON Lisp.
See for example:
http://www.informatimago.com/develop/lisp/com/informatimago/small-cl-pgms/wang.html

Ie. I would propose/advise you to get a Common Lisp implementation
running on MS-Windows. There are several of them.

GNU clisp http://clisp.org
http://sourceforge.net/projects/clisp/files/clisp/2.49/

Clozure CL http://ccl.clozure.com/
http://ccl.clozure.com/download.html

and others (sbcl, clisp and ecl on cygwin, commercial Allegro CL and
Lispworks (student editions are $free), etc).


Then you could write the missing library code to be able to run old
MuLisp code in CL. You'd define a MULISP package and in your programs,
you'd use the MULISP package instead of using the COMMON-LISP package.

The advantages of such a road map would be great:

- it's future proof, since there will always be CL implementations (at
least, until singularity).

- you'll benefit from the work of the smart CL implementers, with nice
optimized and optimizing compilers, and nice debuggers.

- you'll benefit from the work of the smart emacs programmers, with nice
tools such as paredit, slime, etc.


If you could send me a reference manual of MuLisp, I could give you more
advise about how to proceed to make such a MULISP compatibility package
in CL.

> I also have a virtual Red Hat Linux in case I need that. Oh, and also
> PC DOS and Microsoft DOS with Windows 3.1. I love the virtual PC, It
> is a way forward, not back.

Well, the major CL implementations run as well on MS-Windows as on
Linux, so there's no strong reason to switch to linux if you're just
interested in the lisp programming side of things. (On the other hand,
I would always advise to use Linux rather than MS-Windows for the
principle, and quite practical reasons. See for example:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/netapp/2012/09/19/germany-warns-against-internet-explorer-should-cios-take-heed/

[kalvi...@gmail.com]

> Thanks for the info. I use MuLisp on Windows Virtual PC under Windows 98 or 2000, all on 64 bit Windows 7. On 2000 MuLisp works better and looks bettter than it ever did on DOS. There are reasons to preserve old stuff besides history or nostalgia. The biggest is probably old work! It is easier to extend old work if you can still run it and use it in its original form.

Legacy code <3 Legacy OS <3 COBOL <3 :D

[Bernd]

"Pascal J. Bourguignon" <p...@informatimago.com> writes:

> http://compgroups.net/comp.lang.lisp/clisp-for-dos/698157
> The problem is to find an old binary, the release is a source tarball:
> ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/clisp/release/2.32/
> so you'd need an old Borland C compiler (which is now $free, but
> seemingly hard to find too).

If Borland C-compiler is $free now - I own 2 versions (last MS-DOS
only version, and first MS-DOS + Windows version - don't know their
numbers). If it is legal I'll send them to you (only very few MB)...

Bernd

[avodo...@gmail.com]

I found a muLisp copy on my old hard drive, but wanted to check the legal issue before sending it.

Googled a little, translated the wikipedia page from German using google translate. It directed be to a "A site with a free MuLISP86 version here (in Portuguese)" -http://www.din.uem.br/ia/ferramen/monoparadigmas/lisp/implementacao/mulisp/

Transated this page (with Google tranlate), and see they provide muLisp version for free. So you can download it there.