f



OS X or Linux, for Lisp development?

Hello,
   I intend to do lots of learning at home using cmucl, emacs/slime, 
many libraries like CL-SQL, CL-PPCRE etc , and hopefully apache/mod_lisp 
or araneida.

My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using all 
the above be more difficult than on Linux? Would it be best to try to 
install Linux on the Mac? (don't know a lot about Macs, how easy is 
dual-boot OS X/Linux?)

Is there a problem on OS X with there being a lack of a decent packaging 
system? Is it a lot easier to pull in  / build external libraries on 
Linux than OS X?

I don't intend to start a flamewar. ;-) Could someone who's used both 
Linux and OS X make an unbiased comment?

Thanks a lot
Nick
0
nd51 (9)
2/8/2006 1:30:01 PM
comp.lang.lisp 16861 articles. 5 followers. Post Follow

24 Replies
598 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 12

On 2006-02-08 13:30:01 +0000, "N.Davis" <nd51@le.ac.uk> said:

Peter Seibel's Lispbox http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/lispbox
offers an Emacs+slime+OpenMCL in one downloadvle file that
"just works" when installed first time on OSX.

If you love Emacs, that's your dream come true.

LispWorks also offers a "free" personal edition with a more Mac
like editor.

Both work "like a charm", and I haven't encountered any existing
library that I wanted to use that wasn't a simple "asdf" away
from running.

YMMV of course.

Needless to say, Fink http://finkcommander.sourceforge.net/ is
a great way to get "packaged" software installed on your Mac,
either as source or pre-built binaries.
--
JFB

0
verec (363)
2/8/2006 2:13:07 PM
N.Davis wrote:
> Hello,
>   I intend to do lots of learning at home using cmucl, emacs/slime, many 
> libraries like CL-SQL, CL-PPCRE etc , and hopefully apache/mod_lisp or 
> araneida.
> 
> My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using all 
> the above be more difficult than on Linux? Would it be best to try to 
> install Linux on the Mac? (don't know a lot about Macs, how easy is 
> dual-boot OS X/Linux?)

I'm using Aquamacs Emacs + OpenMCL, but on Linux you could use Emacs + 
SBCL or CLisp, so it's pretty much similar.

The commercial offerings run on both Linux and the Mac (and Windows).

> Is there a problem on OS X with there being a lack of a decent packaging 
> system? Is it a lot easier to pull in  / build external libraries on 
> Linux than OS X?

You can just compile and install a normal Lisp (I did that with 
OpenMCL), or you can use Darwinports, Pkgsrc, or Fink as a packaging system.

> I don't intend to start a flamewar. ;-) Could someone who's used both 
> Linux and OS X make an unbiased comment?

During my Non-Mac-Unix time I didn't use Lisp yet, but I don't really 
see a difference.  Get whatever machine and OS you like; the Lisp tools 
are very similar, as is the Unix base underneath.

-- 
Suffering from Gates-induced brain leakage...
0
u.hobelmann (1643)
2/8/2006 3:52:30 PM
I think the OS X and Lisp IDEs like Lispworks are beautiful than the
same things on Linux. If I have enough money, I prefer OS X to Linux,
and Lispworks/Allegro CL to OpenMCL/SBCL+Emacs...

0
2/8/2006 4:27:43 PM
"N.Davis" <nd51@le.ac.uk> writes:

> Is there a problem on OS X with there being a lack of a decent packaging
> system? Is it a lot easier to pull in  / build external libraries on
> Linux than OS X?

Well, I don't think it is necessarily all that different.  I guess the
biggest issue is that there hasn't been quite the degree of
standardization on software package installation systems.

I can offhand think of three:
   Fink     (with GUI FinkCommander)
   i-Installer
   DarwinPorts

There may also be some work on trying to get an RPM-based installer up
for OS X.

Right now the biggest issue (from my point of view) for Lisp development
on the Mac is what sort of disruption the processor switch will mean for
Lisp systems.  I would expect that LispWorks and Allegro would have a
leg up, since they already have systems that run on Intel processors.

OpenMCL and MCL are likely to have more difficulties in making the
switch, since a lot of the highly optimized implementation strategies
for internals (especially garbage collection) tend to exploit particular
features of the underlying processor and paging architecture.

-- 
Thomas A. Russ,  USC/Information Sciences Institute
0
tar (1630)
2/8/2006 7:18:03 PM
"N.Davis" <nd51@le.ac.uk> writes:

> Hello,
>    I intend to do lots of learning at home using cmucl, emacs/slime,
> many libraries like CL-SQL, CL-PPCRE etc , and hopefully
> apache/mod_lisp or araneida.
> 
> My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using
> all the above be more difficult than on Linux? Would it be best to try
> to install Linux on the Mac? (don't know a lot about Macs, how easy is
> dual-boot OS X/Linux?)

Just to be clear on your question, are you referring to running Linux
on an Apple or on an x86 PC?  I'm assuming Apple here.

It probably doesn't make much of a difference, but your life will be
smoother on OS X.  CMUCL and SBCL certainly have more users on OS X
than Linux/PPC, so to the extent there could be a difference, you'd
want to use OS X.

> Is there a problem on OS X with there being a lack of a decent
> packaging system? Is it a lot easier to pull in  / build external
> libraries on Linux than OS X?

If you're talking about Lisp packages, you should install them with
ASDF-Install or portable ASDF-Install, not the OS package system, so
it makes no difference.

> I don't intend to start a flamewar. ;-) Could someone who's used both
> Linux and OS X make an unbiased comment?

Ironically[*], this is one of the few places you can ask such a
question and *not* start a flamewar.  I've been using CMU Lisps (CMUCL
then SBCL) for 7 years now, during which time I've used Linux/x86,
Solaris/SPARC, and OS X/PPC, and I'm currently using all three.  My
favorite platform is OS X, but for Lisp it doesn't make much
difference.  The main thing to know is that CMUCL has cooperative
threading on x86, and SBCL has native threading on Linux/x86.  On
Apple hardware, you'll need to use Allero, MCL, OpenMCL, or Lispworks
to get threads.  That said, I wouldn't sweat it for now -- you
probably don't actually need threads (CMUCL has an event server), and
if you do, it's not hard to switch between different implementations.
I do so routinely, even while working on a single piece of code,
depending on the task at hand.

[*] Ironic because it's not hard to spark flames around here.

-- 
           /|_     .-----------------------.                        
         ,'  .\  / | Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! |
     ,--'    _,'   | Abolish the racist    |
    /       /      | death penalty!        |
   (   -.  |       `-----------------------'
   |     ) |                               
  (`-.  '--.)                              
   `. )----'                               
0
tfb4 (471)
2/8/2006 7:38:14 PM
 Get an Ubuntu live CD for PPC and try it out..that wont be much
trouble...because this is strictly a matter of personal choice...

0
2/8/2006 7:53:00 PM
On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 13:30:01 +0000, N.Davis wrote:

> My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using all 
> the above be more difficult than on Linux?

I've used Linux for something like 6 years, and bought a powerbook a few
months ago.  I now develop on both the powerbook and on an x86 Linux box. 
Switching between them while I'm developing Lisp code is very easy.

When I first got the powerbook I had some culture-shock from the software
but loved the hardware.  Now the situation is pretty much the opposite. 
I've grown to quite like OS X and now find it much more hassle-free than
Linux.  But, the only way I can develop on the powerbook is (and this is
going to sound rather silly):

- put a pillow on my lap
- put a large ice-pack on top of the pillow (the kind that's used for
sporting injuries)
- rest the powerbook on top of the ice-pack

If I don't do this, the fan is constantly on full-power and the powerbook
gets very hot and very slow.  I'm thinking of taking the it in to an apple
store to see if it's normal for the cooling system to be as insanely bad
as mine is.

Best wishes,
	Bill.
0
2/8/2006 8:09:59 PM
"N.Davis" <nd51@le.ac.uk> writes:

> Hello,
>    I intend to do lots of learning at home using cmucl, emacs/slime,
> many libraries like CL-SQL, CL-PPCRE etc , and hopefully apache/mod_lisp
> or araneida.
> 
> My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using all
> the above be more difficult than on Linux? Would it be best to try to
> install Linux on the Mac? (don't know a lot about Macs, how easy is
> dual-boot OS X/Linux?)
> 
> Is there a problem on OS X with there being a lack of a decent packaging
> system? Is it a lot easier to pull in  / build external libraries on
> Linux than OS X?
> 
> I don't intend to start a flamewar. ;-) Could someone who's used both
> Linux and OS X make an unbiased comment?
> 

Its kind of fun to get Mac people all hot and bothered by wiping OS X
and replacing it with Linux- which works nicely by the way, and is
preferable if you need configuration flexibility.  OS X is a fairly
miserable build environment and terrible for operation as a server, it
works if you keep at it but generally its easier on Linux or Solaris.

If you're choosing between OS X and Linux its probably mostly on the
basis of the gui.  If the OS X ui doesn't really work for you, then
you're probably better off with Linux- and at that probably on an x86
laptop.  Linux on Mac works well but the 1 button mouse is a bit silly
though the workarounds are very effective (turn the otherwise useless
Apple keys into middle and right clicks).  As far as x86 Macs go, I'd
skip paying the premium and get an amd based laptop instead.

OTOH, if you're thinking of using older G3 class powerbooks or desktops,
Linux is a great way to make them useful again rather than playing games
with OS 8 or 9.  Sometimes getting the install going on them is tricky
as many Macs of that vintage won't boot the linux install cd's.  I
maintain several G3 powerbooks w/ Linux for PPC development work, if you
don't need a lot of cpu grunt they might be a cheap way to start with.

Gregm

0
2/8/2006 8:53:08 PM
In article <m364npbmiz.fsf@athena.pienet>,
 Greg Menke <gregm-xyzpdq3@toadmail.com> wrote:

> "N.Davis" <nd51@le.ac.uk> writes:
> 
> > Hello,
> >    I intend to do lots of learning at home using cmucl, emacs/slime,
> > many libraries like CL-SQL, CL-PPCRE etc , and hopefully apache/mod_lisp
> > or araneida.
> > 
> > My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using all
> > the above be more difficult than on Linux? Would it be best to try to
> > install Linux on the Mac? (don't know a lot about Macs, how easy is
> > dual-boot OS X/Linux?)
> > 
> > Is there a problem on OS X with there being a lack of a decent packaging
> > system? Is it a lot easier to pull in  / build external libraries on
> > Linux than OS X?
> > 
> > I don't intend to start a flamewar. ;-) Could someone who's used both
> > Linux and OS X make an unbiased comment?
> > 
> 
> Its kind of fun to get Mac people all hot and bothered by wiping OS X
> and replacing it with Linux- which works nicely by the way, and is
> preferable if you need configuration flexibility.

I'd expect Apple hardware to be better supported under Mac OS X.

>  OS X is a fairly
> miserable build environment and terrible for operation as a server, it
> works if you keep at it but generally its easier on Linux or Solaris.

I find Mac OS X server (which is a separate product) to be easier
to maintain and use than, say, Solaris.

http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/

> If you're choosing between OS X and Linux its probably mostly on the
> basis of the gui.  If the OS X ui doesn't really work for you, then
> you're probably better off with Linux- and at that probably on an x86
> laptop.  Linux on Mac works well but the 1 button mouse is a bit silly
> though the workarounds are very effective (turn the otherwise useless
> Apple keys into middle and right clicks).  As far as x86 Macs go, I'd
> skip paying the premium and get an amd based laptop instead.

You are aware that new Apple iMacs and PowerMacs
are coming with a multi-button mouse? 

http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/

That you can use under Mac OS X most multi-button USB mice?
That right-click (with single button control-click) is widely
used in Mac OS X software?

> 
> OTOH, if you're thinking of using older G3 class powerbooks or desktops,
> Linux is a great way to make them useful again rather than playing games
> with OS 8 or 9.  Sometimes getting the install going on them is tricky
> as many Macs of that vintage won't boot the linux install cd's.  I
> maintain several G3 powerbooks w/ Linux for PPC development work, if you
> don't need a lot of cpu grunt they might be a cheap way to start with.
> 
> Gregm

-- 
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
0
joswig8642 (2203)
2/9/2006 12:12:09 AM
In article <pan.2006.02.08.20.09.58.600041@gmail.com>,
 William Bland <doctorbill.news@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 13:30:01 +0000, N.Davis wrote:
> 
> > My question is, if I use an Apple Mac running OS X 10.3, will using all 
> > the above be more difficult than on Linux?
> 
> I've used Linux for something like 6 years, and bought a powerbook a few
> months ago.  I now develop on both the powerbook and on an x86 Linux box. 
> Switching between them while I'm developing Lisp code is very easy.
> 
> When I first got the powerbook I had some culture-shock from the software
> but loved the hardware.  Now the situation is pretty much the opposite. 
> I've grown to quite like OS X and now find it much more hassle-free than
> Linux.  But, the only way I can develop on the powerbook is (and this is
> going to sound rather silly):
> 
> - put a pillow on my lap
> - put a large ice-pack on top of the pillow (the kind that's used for
> sporting injuries)
> - rest the powerbook on top of the ice-pack
> 
> If I don't do this, the fan is constantly on full-power and the powerbook
> gets very hot and very slow.  I'm thinking of taking the it in to an apple
> store to see if it's normal for the cooling system to be as insanely bad
> as mine is.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 	Bill.

Some Apple laptops were getting quite hot. But mostly these
were older (Titanium) models. Many Newer Powerbooks don't have this
problem, since the newer G4 CPUs are not getting that hot.
Though there still might be a problem with the smaller 12"
Powerbook. I had a 800Mhz G4 Powerbook which was getting a bit hot.
My newer 1.3 Ghz 17" Alu Powerbook doesn't have that problem.

The more CPU cycles are used, the hotter the laptop gets.
Sometimes some programs are using the CPU unnecessary.
I usually have MenuMeters installed to have a look at the
CPU usage.

http://www.ragingmenace.com/software/menumeters/

-- 
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
0
joswig8642 (2203)
2/9/2006 12:18:18 AM
Rainer Joswig <joswig@lisp.de> writes:

> Though there still might be a problem with the smaller 12"
> Powerbook. 

I have a fairly recent 12" (2004 model, 1.33Ghz) and don't think
this is a problem.

> The more CPU cycles are used, the hotter the laptop gets.
> Sometimes some programs are using the CPU unnecessary.
> I usually have MenuMeters installed to have a look at the
> CPU usage.

I use Apple's built-in Activity Monitor with its window closed, but
with its dock icon set to display cpu usage, so I always quickly
discover when something is gobbling up my cpu power (and thus draining
my battery and warming up my legs :-)). Usually it's some website with
lots of stupid animated ads...
-- 
  (espen)
0
espen1 (448)
2/9/2006 9:00:36 AM
Hello,
   Thanks everyone for very helpful replies.

Looks like either way will be OK for Lisp then.

I particularly liked the idea of "ready-to-go" the Lisp-in-a-box for OS 
X though.

Cheers

Nick
0
nd51 (9)
2/9/2006 5:13:35 PM
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 10:00:36 +0100, Espen Vestre wrote:

> Rainer Joswig <joswig@lisp.de> writes:
> 
>> Though there still might be a problem with the smaller 12"
>> Powerbook. 
> 
> I have a fairly recent 12" (2004 model, 1.33Ghz) and don't think
> this is a problem.
> 
>> The more CPU cycles are used, the hotter the laptop gets.
>> Sometimes some programs are using the CPU unnecessary.
>> I usually have MenuMeters installed to have a look at the
>> CPU usage.
> 
> I use Apple's built-in Activity Monitor with its window closed, but
> with its dock icon set to display cpu usage, so I always quickly
> discover when something is gobbling up my cpu power (and thus draining
> my battery and warming up my legs :-)). Usually it's some website with
> lots of stupid animated ads...

Thanks for the suggestions but there would be no point in me using a cpu
monitor, as I already know that my cpu is frequently pegged at nearly 100%

Some of the software I develop tends to be *meant* to use up all available
cpu.  Perhaps I need to accept that my powerbook (12", 2005) isn't really
designed for developing this kind of software...?

Cheers,
	Bill.
0
2/9/2006 5:37:17 PM
William Bland <doctorbill.news@gmail.com> writes:

> Some of the software I develop tends to be *meant* to use up all
> available cpu. Perhaps I need to accept that my powerbook (12",
> 2005) isn't really designed for developing this kind of software...?

What I want to know is how you deal with the condensation that
presumably forms between the ice pack and your computer.

-Peter

-- 
Peter Seibel           * peter@gigamonkeys.com
Gigamonkeys Consulting * http://www.gigamonkeys.com/
Practical Common Lisp  * http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
0
peter14 (674)
2/9/2006 5:58:31 PM
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 17:58:31 +0000, Peter Seibel wrote:

> William Bland <doctorbill.news@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> Some of the software I develop tends to be *meant* to use up all
>> available cpu. Perhaps I need to accept that my powerbook (12",
>> 2005) isn't really designed for developing this kind of software...?
> 
> What I want to know is how you deal with the condensation that
> presumably forms between the ice pack and your computer.
> 

Hehe, it does indeed - gets quite wet.  The bottom of the powerbook seems
waterproof so far, but it does make me nervous of course...

Cheers,
	Bill.
0
2/9/2006 6:15:37 PM
William Bland wrote:

> - put a pillow on my lap
> - put a large ice-pack on top of the pillow (the kind that's used for
> sporting injuries)
> - rest the powerbook on top of the ice-pack
>
> If I don't do this, the fan is constantly on full-power and the powerbook
> gets very hot and very slow.  I'm thinking of taking the it in to an apple
> store to see if it's normal for the cooling system to be as insanely bad
> as mine is.

This is interesting. I once had a similar problem on a "Gericom laptop"
which run SuSE Linux. At processor consuming tasks the cooling fan
didn't work an I had to reboot after 20 minutes since I always got a
frozen screen. I had the laptop at service but they didn't believe me
though, the "heating" was always reproducible.

After that I bought an ibook G4 and run the same processor consuming
tasks under Bigloo and never had to experience any problem with
cooling. The Apple dealer assured me I can give the ibook back if everr
will experience a similar cooling problem as it was the case with my
Gericom Linux laptop.


Schneewittchen

0
chain_lube (440)
2/11/2006 11:10:08 AM
Rainer Joswig wrote:

> You are aware that new Apple iMacs and PowerMacs
> are coming with a multi-button mouse?
>
> http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/
>
> That you can use under Mac OS X most multi-button USB mice?
> That right-click (with single button control-click) is widely
> used in Mac OS X software?

I am used to use a 3 button wheel mouse from "hp" with my ibook. The
mouse should be the simplest problem to cope with when using a Mac.

At my universities office there is also a Ubuntu Linux desktop machine.
However, I like it much more to work with my ibook, though, it is only
12" screen but a virtual desktop manager (as usual under X11 Linux)
will easily solve all that shortcomings. From all the bad user systems
out there the Mac OSX is the best. 

Schneewittchen

0
chain_lube (440)
2/11/2006 11:17:00 AM
F�rster vom Silberwald wrote:
> At my universities office there is also a Ubuntu Linux desktop machine.
> However, I like it much more to work with my ibook, though, it is only
> 12" screen but a virtual desktop manager (as usual under X11 Linux)
> will easily solve all that shortcomings. From all the bad user systems
> out there the Mac OSX is the best. 

And if you don't like it, there's always the option of X11 running 
full-screen, with whatever UI you want.

-- 
Suffering from Gates-induced brain leakage...
0
u.hobelmann (1643)
2/11/2006 11:35:51 AM
Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:

> And if you don't like it, there's always the option of X11 running
> full-screen, with whatever UI you want.

I cannot understand why people want to use the Microsoft Windows at
all. The Mac OSX is so much more pleasing in appearance and usability.
Where Mac OSX has sex-appeal Windows has none. The tragedy actually is:
some people prefer to use Windows /deliberately/. Okay, I know of
people who still program in Fortran 77.

Schneewittchen

0
chain_lube (440)
2/11/2006 12:41:19 PM
F�rster vom Silberwald wrote:
> Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
> 
>> And if you don't like it, there's always the option of X11 running
>> full-screen, with whatever UI you want.
> 
> I cannot understand why people want to use the Microsoft Windows at
> all. The Mac OSX is so much more pleasing in appearance and usability.

Have you heard of "different tastes?"

Also, lots of people develop on Windows, because that gives them a big 
potential number of buyers.

> Where Mac OSX has sex-appeal Windows has none. The tragedy actually is:
> some people prefer to use Windows /deliberately/. Okay, I know of
> people who still program in Fortran 77.

I've heard of people who love Java.

-- 
Suffering from Gates-induced brain leakage...
0
u.hobelmann (1643)
2/11/2006 1:12:17 PM
Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
> F�rster vom Silberwald wrote:
> 
>> Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:
>>
>>> And if you don't like it, there's always the option of X11 running
>>> full-screen, with whatever UI you want.
>>
>> I cannot understand why people want to use the Microsoft Windows at
>> all. The Mac OSX is so much more pleasing in appearance and usability.
> 
> Have you heard of "different tastes?"

Few people who use Windows know the alternatives.

> I've heard of people who love Java.

Few people who use Java know the alternatives.


Pascal

-- 
My website: http://p-cos.net
Closer to MOP & ContextL:
http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/
0
pc56 (3929)
2/11/2006 1:14:09 PM
Pascal Costanza wrote:
>> Have you heard of "different tastes?"
> 
> Few people who use Windows know the alternatives.

All have heard of them, but only very few have ever seriously tried 
them, yes.

Interesting that most of those who have, prefer other systems.

>> I've heard of people who love Java.
> 
> Few people who use Java know the alternatives.

I'd say most everybody who knows Java has heard of alternatives; 
probably lots have seen alternatives.  But just like with OSes, few have 
seriously tried them.  Interestingly, even here, those who tried other 
languages, usually prefer them.

I see a pattern ;)

(One friend of mine actually tried CL and didn't like it because of the 
()s.  He's a Ruby-fan now, after being a Java-user for some time before.)

-- 
Suffering from Gates-induced brain leakage...
0
u.hobelmann (1643)
2/11/2006 1:37:42 PM
Ulrich Hobelmann wrote:

> (One friend of mine actually tried CL and didn't like it because of the 
> ()s.  He's a Ruby-fan now, after being a Java-user for some time before.)

Be patient - give them a few days... ;)

Pascal

-- 
My website: http://p-cos.net
Closer to MOP & ContextL:
http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/
0
pc56 (3929)
2/11/2006 1:40:14 PM
On 2006-02-11 13:12:17 +0000, Ulrich Hobelmann <u.hobelmann@web.de> said:

>> I cannot understand why people want to use the Microsoft Windows at
>> all. The Mac OSX is so much more pleasing in appearance and usability.
> 
> Have you heard of "different tastes?"

You mean: those who have some taste, and those who do
not have any at all ?

:-)

--
JFB

0
verec (363)
2/11/2006 2:27:38 PM
Reply: