On possibility i have been thinking about would be to just move the commonlisp clm3 (or clm4) lisp sources to r5rs scheme and to then replace the current FFI.lisp with different FFI.scm for different schemes (ie ffi-guile.scm ffi-chicken.scm ...) My guess is this system would run basically as fast as sbcl clm3 since most of the stuff happens in C anyway. My main reluctance is that as bill says this code is not main clm branch that runs in snd and im not smart enough to port this code. on the other hand clm3 works really well, is pretty fast and is not a large system. Still it would be a fair amount of work to port it to scheme, albeit most of the work is very straightforward translation from common lisp to scheme syntax, and recasting some defclass with define-records. If anyone would be willing to help out on this work please send me a note. I probably wont do it if im the only one working on it!
> In regard to CLM, I think the Scheme version is better > than the Common Lisp version, mainly because > I much prefer working in Snd. The CM work however > has gone toward Chicken scheme and Juce, and > Snd can't deal with either one. There's no "technical" > roadblock -- just my aversion to C++ and hard work, > and Chicken doesn't know what the word "embed" > means, and I'm having too much fun with sound > synthesis to bear knuckling down to that kind of > frantic cut-and-curse-for-a-month programming. _______________________________________________ Cmdist mailing list [email protected] http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist
