[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RE: MCL Application Framework

> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 14:26:20 EST
> From: cfry@MIT.EDU (Christopher Fry)
> ....
> CLIM is now supported on many machines. Support for it on the Mac is
> comming from ILA. CLIM was designed with CLOS as an integral part by people intimately 
> familiar with Lisp-based window systems [which have a much longer history than C-based 
> window  systems]. Without knowing more details on BEDROCK, my guess is that CLIM is closer 
> to the right thing for CL environments than BEDROCK.

I haven't looked at the technical details, but my somewhat ill-informed opinion is that 
although Bedrock and CLIM have some overlap, each also does a lot that the other doesn't do. 
You can also bet the farm that Bedrock will receive a lot more development and support 
resources than CLIM, more than just the extra resources required to compensate for the 
disadvantages of doing it in C++.  I'd like to see the Lisp community get some benefit from 
all that expenditure.

This suggests to me that 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.  In the long term I 
think this would be better for everybody.