Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!mikel From: mikel@Apple.COM (Mikel Evins) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Allegro CL on NeXT Keywords: ACL, Allegro CL, Common Lisp, Franz Message-ID: <50632@apple.Apple.COM> Date: 22 Mar 91 18:48:12 GMT References: <13720@darkstar.ucsc.edu> Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA Lines: 30 In article <13720@darkstar.ucsc.edu> isbell@ucscf.UCSC.EDU (Art Isbell) writes: > >In article layer@Franz.COM (Kevin Layer) writes: >>[3 plusses for running ACL on NeXT] > >I would be interested in having Kevin's objective opinion on how the NeXT >platform compares with other platforms that run ACL. Kevin has provided a few >nice plusses, but what about negatives? How is ACL's performance on NeXT? >What is the minimum RAM configuration recommended? My dealings with Franz suggest that Kevin cannot comment on your question. Franz has a policy of not comparing their performance on various hardware, because such comparisons could be construed as constituting endorsements of particular vendors, and so could be seen as conflict of interest issues, or at least piss off some of the vendors they support. I have benchmarks for various lisps on various platforms, but I got some of them on the condition that I not distribute them publicly. On the basis of what I know, I would describe ACL on the NeXT as adequate, but not stellar. The fastest Lisp I know of right now is Lucid on the SPARCStation 2 (actually, Lucid on the Apollo DN 10000 is probably faster, but the price range is different, and the future of the hardware is unclear). (This is assuming stock hardware, not Lisp machines). If you like, I can run the Gabriels myself if I ever get my upgrade copy of ACL for my 040 cube, and mail you the results.