Abstract
We report a comparison of three commercially available LISP interpreters running on MS-DOS-based microcomputers. Marked differences were found between the different products' memory addressing abilities, error handling and debugging facilities. Editing tools, tutoring environments, windowing, graphic capabilities, operating system and port call facilities are also contrasted. Speed was tested via a group of LISP functions (benchmarks) that attempt to isolate list manipulation, iteration, function calling, recursion and mathematical calculation performance.
Full text
PDF
