CLISP VS MLton

• Cross-platform compatibility
  CLISP is available on multiple platforms including Windows, macOS, and Linux, which makes it versatile and accessible for developers across different operating systems.
• GNU Licensing
  Being licensed under the GNU General Public License, CLISP is free to use, modify, and distribute, which is beneficial for open-source projects and encourages community contributions.
• Interpreter environment
  CLISP offers an interactive interpreter environment, allowing for rapid testing and prototyping of code, which can speed up development and debugging processes.
• ANSI Common Lisp compliance
  CLISP adheres to the ANSI Common Lisp standard, ensuring that programs written in CLISP are compliant with the standard and thus more portable and reliable.

Possible disadvantages

• Performance limitations
  Compared to other Lisp implementations like SBCL, CLISP might exhibit slower performance, which can be a drawback for computation-heavy applications.
• Limited support for external libraries
  CLISP may have limited or less convenient access to certain external libraries or advanced features compared to other implementations, potentially making integration with other systems or technologies more challenging.
• Outdated documentation
  Some of CLISP's documentation and resources might be outdated, which can pose challenges for new users trying to learn and resolve issues using the available materials.
• Less active community
  Compared to more popular Lisp systems, CLISP might have a smaller or less active community, which can result in fewer community-contributed resources or slower developments and updates.

• Performance
  MLton is known for producing highly optimized, efficient executables due to its whole-program compilation approach. This can result in faster performance compared to other Standard ML compilers.
• Standard ML Compliance
  MLton has strong adherence to the Standard ML language specification, ensuring that programs written for MLton are highly portable and conform to the expected language standards.
• Rich Optimization
  The compiler includes numerous optimization techniques, enabling better runtime performance and memory usage for compiled applications.
• Large Language Support
  MLton supports the full breadth of the Standard ML language, including advanced features like functors and modules.

Possible disadvantages

• Compilation Time
  Due to its whole-program optimization techniques, MLton can take longer to compile programs compared to other compilers that use separate compilation.
• Executable Size
  Although MLton optimizes for performance, this can sometimes result in larger executable sizes than compilers that don't perform as many optimizations.
• Limited Interactivity
  MLton is optimized for batch processing and does not provide interactive development features like a REPL (Read-Eval-Print Loop), which can be a downside for some developers used to interactive programming environments.
• Platform Availability
  While MLton supports several platforms, its availability may not be as widespread as other more commonly used programming environments, which could limit use in certain contexts.

GNU CLISP - Brief introduction to install and setup of an artificially intelligent environment

No MLton videos yet. You could help us improve this page by suggesting one.

• What are the advantages for an imperative language to not be expression based?

  CLisp is an unfortunate contraction, also naming an implementation, but yes, the Common Lisp spec is that big. Source: over 3 years ago

• Abstraction boundaries are optimization boundaries

  The author is right to note that Haskell can optimise across module (abstraction) boundaries. However I remember that in my childhood that Debray [1] did a lot of work on link-time optimisations (late 1980s). And of course there's the... - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• Simple JSON parser in c++, rust, ocaml, standard ml

  Once I got the parser ready in OCaml, I thought I port it to Standard ML, since it belong to the same ML language family. I was also curious on how well mlton could optimise it. The language lacks custom let bindings, so I resorted to... - Source: dev.to / over 3 years ago

• Ante: A low-level functional language

  If you’re fine with tracing GC (which depends on the situation, of course), Standard ML is a perfectly boring language (that IIUC predated and inspired Caml) and MLton[1] is a very nice optimizing compiler for it. The language is awkward... - Source: Hacker News / over 4 years ago

View more