[Shootout-list] Two notes: Pascal and CMUCL

[Yvoe Ywon]

Hi,
I really liked Doug's Shootout and it's great that
it's living again :)

You are listing CMU's Common Lisp implementation
between those which compile to native code...
Now I know this was debated to death... but still:
Say; GCC _can_ compile C code to native code, that can
be run *standalone* (only needs the OS for doing
syscalls). Now, GCC _can_ even compile C code (which
possibly needs some ASM in this case too) to be
*completely* *standalone* native code. Like an OS's
kernel.
I accept that CMUCL can compile to what is often
called "native code", (and I'm using CMUCL since ages
and I like it...) but it doesn't belong into the same
category as GCC (and others like GHC, etc) in this
sense. The compiled FASL code _needs_ the lisp
runtime. Of course you can tell GCC to link your app
dynamically so it needs a (runtime?) library too.
However, you cannot get CMUCL to "link" the code
statically... See?
I think a different category might be added like
"compiles to standalone code".

The other thing:
I would be really happy to see Pascal among the
contestants =) No! Don't laugh. Really. It's in the
"Win32 Shootout", but since the same excellent Pascal
compiler is available to Linux/*NIX too (and don't
forget GNU Pascal) it has it's place in this reborn
Shootout ;) I would be happy to port/fix/extend the
Pascal code to work on Linux with FPC/GPC and see you
surprised when it beats C++ :>
(But even if it doesn't, I am sure it won't be one of
"those at the end".)


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com