Subject: Re: LISP for Windows From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 1998/12/12 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Ian Wild <firstname.lastname@example.org> | I do a lot of work at the Unix command line, piping stuff from here to | there though this and that, with the odd rerouting through A and B. | Writing my filters in Scheme is a ton easier than perl, awk, bash, or | whatever. I couldn't /possibly/ use CL here - the load time alone would | kill me. on my dual 400MHz Pentium II machine with 512M RAM, Emacs and Allegro Common Lisp start in 0.04 real-time seconds, mostly because Emacs has to talk the X protocol with the slower 50MHz SPARCstation 2 that is still my X server, while bash starts in 0.001 seconds. I tend to start Emacs and Allegro CL once every week or so, while there have been more than 8000 invocations of bash since my system last booted 5 days ago. speaking of which, it took several _minutes_ to boot after a prolonged power failure (I love the cold of winter -- NOT!), with all the disks it has to check and all the other silly things it has to do, but I still don't count the boot time when I measure the running time of my programs. isn't that odd? oh, by the way, I have tried scsh. it took 0.7 seconds to load while in the disk cache on this system. I think I'll fault Scheme for that today. I hope this was almost as silly as your conjecture, but illuminating. #:Erik -- man who cooks while hacking eats food that has died twice.