Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!mcvax!inria!laas!nastassia!ralph From: ralph@nastassia.laas.fr (Ralph P. Sobek) Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Wanted: Info. on IBUKI vs. Sun Common Lisp Summary: Sounds great!! Message-ID: <392@laas.laas.fr> Date: 11 Jul 89 16:31:51 GMT References: <925@iraun1.ira.uka.de> Sender: news@laas.laas.fr Reply-To: ralph@laas.laas.fr Organization: LAAS-CNRS, Toulouse, France Lines: 18 In article andrewt@watsnew.waterloo.edu (Andrew Thomas) writes: | | nice. My only complaint about IBCL is the large executable size. My | application uses no extras like PCL, and the executable is still about | 2.4 Meg. With CLX loaded it's 3.8 MEg, and with PCL loaded it's 3.4 | Meg. with both CLX and PCL it's 5.2 Meg. This is enough to make me | unpopular with the system people once in a while. How lucky you are!! We use Sun Common Lisp (3.0) and it's nice but 9 Megs minimum to do anything. We sometimes get two lisps running simultaneously and all of 40 Megs are eaten up!! Ralph P. Sobek Disclaimer: The above ruminations are my own. ralph@laas.laas.fr Addresses are ordered by importance. ralph@laas.uucp, or ...!uunet!mcvax!laas!ralph If all else fails, try: SOBEK@FRMOP11.BITNET sobek@eclair.Berkeley.EDU =============================================================================== Upon the instruments of death the sunlight brightly gleams. -- King Crimson