The cost of CLIM and its future

• To: clim@BBN.COM
• Subject: The cost of CLIM and its future
• From: Kenneth Forbus <forbus@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu>
• Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 15:34:32 CDT
• Cc: forbus@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu

I'm afraid, despite being a strong CLIM supporter, that the recent
messages regarding the hobbling of CLIM via license fees have a strong
ring of truth to them.

I distribute software for free to students and interested researchers.
Right now I cannot presume they have CLIM, since many of them use
public-domain CL implementations.  If my code >>requires<< CLIM, they
lose.  Consequently, I end up (a) maintaining character-oriented
portable interfaces [probably a good idea anyway], and (b) exploring
C++ as a means of getting programs into student's hands on really
small (e.g., 386) machines.  I'm not very happy about this.

I know that the Lisp vendors are struggling to survive.  However, more
and more people I know are choosing public-domain CL interface
packages over CLIM.  Personally, I'm reasonably happy with CLIM.  But
then again, I'm able to afford the licenses and really need the
portability.  I don't see CLIM gaining momentum (more the opposite),
which is exceedingly sad because I think it's a very good system.

	Ken


0,,

• The cost of CLIM and its future
• From: Scott McKay <SWM@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com>
• Re: The cost of CLIM and its future
• From: Thomas Kirk <tk@HUNNY.research.att.com>

• Prev: Re: references of CLIM sought
• Next: contents of clim-library as of 92/09/09
• Index: CLIM Mailing list (1-Sep-92 to 31-Dec-92)
• Thread: CLIM Mailing list Index (1-Sep-92 to 31-Dec-92)