CLIM mail archive
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: The cost of CLIM and its future
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 19:09:57 EDT
From: Arun Welch <welch@cis.ohio-state.edu>
>
> Could somebody suggest a way that us Lisp companies get to stay in
> business?
Sorry, but you'll get no sympathy from me on that score. Stuffing yet
another Lisp window system down the user's throats and then claiming
that it's costing you too much to support just doesn't sit well. I
view CLIM as something the big Lisp companies are promoting as a way
to drive some of the smaller companies out of the market.
... at this year's AAAI I can't think of anyone who really wanted
it when talking to me at the Venue booth, and only a couple of people
even asked if we implemented it.
I don't understand how I should reconcile the two statements "stuffing
yet another Lisp window system down the users' throats" and "only a
couple of people even asked if we implemented it." Believe me, the
original ILA effort started precisely because users wanted a facility
which allowed for the delivery of Lisp applications, with user
interface, across all Lisp platforms. This concern (portability)
outdistanced all others, and remains the primary goal of CLIM today.
I know we can't expect sympathy, but can we get suggestions? Can you
suggest something on the market which addresses the Symbolics -> MCL
-> Lucid -> Franz -> Harlequin portability issue? Should application
developers go back to writing N different versions of their
application, one for each Lisp windowing system? I think not.
0,,
Follow-Ups:
Main Index |
Thread Index