2008/10/18 M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > GCL (and Clisp) are both reasonable implementations of Common Lisp. > However, they are both GPL, which I think is an issue for PostgreSQL > community members. CMUCL development more or less stalled out, and many > of the heavyweights moved to Steel Bank Common Lisp (SBCL). It's kind of > a joke -- Carnegie => Steel, Mellon => Bank, so Carnegie Mellon > (University) Common Lisp => Steel Bank Common Lisp. :) > > In any event, SBCL is MIT-licensed, which is free of some of the more > "annoying" GPL restrictions. BTW, I checked on XLispStat and it seems to > be frozen in time -- most of the people who used to use XLispStat > (including me) have moved on to R (which is GPL, unfortunately).
I'm not an expert, but from lurking on the SBCL mailing list for a while, I can say the following: SBCL is a big and very sophisticated program. It's designed to be a self-contained Lisp system and has (AFAIK) no concessions to "embeddability". It uses threads internally, and plays games with the memory map to make GC more efficient. Only a small part of it is written in C, and the rest is Lisp compiled directly to binary. It would almost certainly be a heroic project to make it coexist with a PostgreSQL backend process--like Java, but much worse. It's not likely that any of the "serious" Common Lisp systems would be easily embedded in Postgres. -Doug -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
