RE: RE: MCL Application Framework

["pierce" <pierce@at-mail-server.vitro.com>]

David,

>A good strategy would be for CLIM 3.0 to be based on Bedrock; that is, for the
>overlapping part of CLIM (probably a little less than half) to be removed and
>replaced with Bedrock, and CLIM to concentrate on its unique advantages.

I agree with this completely.

To make this happen, implementors of the Bedrock interface part of CLIM 3.0 for
the Mac will either need access to a linkable version of MCL source, or depend
on a very robust foreign function interface.

Are you recommending that CLIM 3.0 implementors use the existing MCL foreign
function interface to code a LISP interface to Bedrock?

If not, Apple will have to implement this part of CLIM 3.0 or provide access to
MCL as some kind of linkable library.

-Jonathan