Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!think!kulla!barmar
From: barmar@kulla (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Static v. Dynamic Class Structure
Message-ID: <31027@news.Think.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 89 18:45:31 GMT
References: <HUME.89Oct19162731@buckwheat.sps.mot.com> <ALMS.89Oct23180936@brazil.cambridge.apple.com> <1292@mrsvr.UUCP>
Sender: news@Think.COM
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Lines: 19

In article <1292@mrsvr.UUCP> hallett@gemed.ge.com (Jeffrey A. Hallett (414) 548-5163) writes:
>I am  interested  in seeing CLOS   over  on  the Mac  under (formerly)
>Allegro  Common Lisp.  I am under  the  impression that CLOS itself is
>freely  distributed (various implementations cost  $, but CLOS itself,
>like TeX, is free).  

There's no such thing as "CLOS itself".  CLOS is a specification, not a
program.

As far as I've heard, there are no portable implementations of CLOS, and
hence no free ones.  You may be thinking of PCL (Portable Common LOOPS),
which is close to CLOS but has some minor differences (I don't know the
extent of the differences).


Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar