Subject: Re: C++ to CLOS mapping
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 20:33:50 -0600
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>
Edi Weitz  <> wrote:
| But allow me to get serious for a second.  My personal experience is
| that adding a C/C++ library to a Lisp project increases the amount of
| headache you'll eventually have in the deployment phase by an order of
| magnitude.  I've worked on a project which involved access to SQL
| databases via CLSQL and every time we had to install the application
| on a new machine we encountered new problems (costing valuable time)
| which were all related to the C libraries, their versions, their
| locations, environment variables, all that stuff.  I've had similar
| problems with GD and other C libs.
| Whenever there's a chance to have a solution that's "Lisp all the way
| down", I'll go for it, even if it looks like a bit more work in the
| beginning.  ...

Yup. Every time I hear somebody say that it makes me really, *really*
glad that I went with <> back in 2002 when I
started writing SQL-backed web apps in CL. I've had the version of
PostgreSQL running in dedicated production servers in co-lo sites
"accidentally" upgraded several times by careless "Customer Care"
admins, even though they had been specifically instructed not to!!

Never mind, the CL apps kept working just fine, since PG speaks the
PostgreSQL socket protocol directly, *not* some C library binding.
Thanks again to Eric Marsden for this fine tool.


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607