5 ms·
It is also because CLISP is unmaintaned. But the only implementation dependant code I remember is the socket code. But CLISP wasn't unmaintaned when the boo
by PuercoPop 9y ago
It is also because CLISP is unmaintaned. But the only implementation dependant code I remember is the socket code.
But CLISP wasn't unmaintaned when the book was written más its default REPL is much better than other implementations. It was a good choice at the time.
- krylon 9y ago> CLISP is unmaintaned AFAIK, it is not really unmaintained, the developers just haven't done a release in years. When I fire up CLisp on openSUSE Tubmbleweed (their rolling release distro), it says Welcome to GNU CLISP 2.49.60+ (2017-06-25) <http://clisp.org/> That would make me think that development might have slowed down, but not stopped.
- uxp 9y agoYet, if you visit that URL, you are greeted with : Current version: 2.49 (2010-07-07) Seems like the patch level on openSUSE is provided by the package maintainer, not CLISP. It looks like Debian Wheezy is at "2.49-8.1", Ubuntu Xenial is at "2.49-9ubuntu1", FreeBSD Ports is at "2.49_6", but also marked deprecated/expired as of 2014. I'd venture that the maintainer is applying patches to the upstream source to keep it running on the OSes when they update ABIs, etc.
- krylon 9y agoThe most recent commit to the source tree (https://sourceforge.net/p/clisp/clisp/ci/tip/tree/ https://sourceforge.net/p/clisp/clisp/ci/tip/tree/) was today. Not sure how much that is worth - with no release in seven years, I would guess there is not much going on. But it is still more than nothing.