Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!att!princeton!phoenix.princeton.edu!weinrich
From: weinrich@clarity.Princeton.EDU (Tim Weinrich)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Lucid (Sun) Common Lisp vs Allegro (Franz) Common Lisp
Message-ID: <WEINRICH.91Mar21165500@lexis.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 21 Mar 91 16:55:00 GMT
Sender: news@idunno.Princeton.EDU
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cognitive Science Lab.  Princeton University.
Lines: 40


   Has anyone had a chance to compare Lucid Common Lisp to Allegro
Common Lisp running on a Sun 3 or 4?  I need to know people's
impressions of the advantages/drawbacks of the two dialects wrt each
other.

   I have only a minimal interest in speed comparisons.  I am much
more interested in people's experiences with things like the
following:

	- Difficulties in translating existing Lisp code (not
necessarily Common Lisp) to Lucid or Allegro.

	- Bugs - situations in which the implementation is clearly
contrary to Steele.

	- Things you needed to do and couldnt, even if Steele doesnt
require it.  (Things like ERRSETs and communication with Unix/other
programs, perhaps.)

	- The company's responsiveness to questions and bug reports.

	- Difficulties in compilation.

	- Preferences in debuggers.

   I am happy to receive responses from people affiliated with one of
the companies, as long as you identify yourself as such.

   Perhaps someone has already posted a comparison of these Lisps and
I missed the discussion.  (I was away for a while.)  If so, could
someone forward me a copy?

   Reply directly to me and, if people are interested, I will post a
compilation of the responses.

   Thanx!


   Twinerik