
Steel Bank Common Lisp 2.0 - bjoli
http://www.sbcl.org/all-news.html?2.0.0#2.0.0
======
lispm
SBCL was forked from CMU Common Lisp 20 years ago, which was started as a
project as Spice Lisp at CMU 39 years ago.

~~~
agumonkey
did we reach root ?

~~~
wrycoder
[http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/faqs/lang/lisp/part2/fa...](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/faqs/lang/lisp/part2/faq-
doc-13.html) Apparently, Spice is a derivative of MacLisp.

~~~
ScottBurson
A "dialect" of MacLisp, the page says. I doubt there was any code in common.

~~~
pfdietz
The LOOP macro may have been derived from MacLisp.

------
reikonomusha
SBCL folks recently had a workshop in Vienna, Austria:
[http://www.sbcl.org/sbcl20/](http://www.sbcl.org/sbcl20/)

~~~
samus
Yeah, was quite surprising to find out on the Intranet. As far as I know, the
company that hosted the workshop doesn't use any Lisp dialect at all^^

~~~
lispm
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21842644](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21842644)

------
capableweb
Worth noting is that according to the Download page[1], only amd64 linux has
had 2.0 binaries released. None of the other platforms has it yet (so macOS
and Windows doesn't [yet])

\- [1] [http://www.sbcl.org/platform-table.html](http://www.sbcl.org/platform-
table.html)

~~~
reikonomusha
It’s incredibly easy to build yourself. Literally just

    
    
        sh make.sh --fancy
    

(--fancy isn’t even required, but builds all optional additions.)

Installation?

    
    
        sh install.sh

~~~
inetsee
I haven't found it that easy.

My package manager installs version 1.4. I downloaded the version 2.0 package
from the website, and ran the "install.sh" script per the Getting Started
instructions for installing a binary. When I tried running it I got the
following error:

/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.28' not found (required by
/usr/local/bin/sbcl)

I couldn't find a "make.sh" file in the package that I downloaded, and I'm not
enough of an expert to solve the GLIBC version error problem.

~~~
reikonomusha
make.sh is included in the source release [0]. Download that, not the binary
release. The binary release is only needed for either bootstrapping or for a
compatible binary installation. (Evidently your glibc isn’t compatible with
the binary release; building from source should be as easy as I suggest
above.)

Once you install it, you can uninstall your system-provided SBCL.

[0] It’s linked at the top of [http://www.sbcl.org/platform-
table.html](http://www.sbcl.org/platform-table.html)

~~~
inetsee
Thank you. That worked perfectly for me.

------
forgotpwd16
Is there any reason this merited a major version bump or it happened because
it remained as v1 for too long?

~~~
capableweb
From Christophe Rhodes[1]

> So, I'm not particularly thinking of sbcl-2.0.0 in terms of semantic

> versioning. In fact, my loose plan for further releases is to aim for

> about 11 releases a year, and increment the second-level number every

> year or so, to keep a rough alignment with calendar years. Our users

> should be trained by now that every release is a potentially-breaking

> release, right?

\- [1] [https://sourceforge.net/p/sbcl/mailman/sbcl-
devel/thread/877...](https://sourceforge.net/p/sbcl/mailman/sbcl-
devel/thread/877e2q4sok.fsf%40shin/#msg36883701)

------
nabla9
Every decade major version number increases.

------
jhoechtl
How is multi processor and native multi threading support and support of the
two concepts in the GC?

~~~
reikonomusha
The GC is neither parallel nor concurrent. Luis Oliveira implemented a
parallel GC in SBCL but it was slower IIRC.

------
mapcars
Congratulations!

------
cpach
Apparently released today :)

------
simias
I appreciate the commitment to semver, it seems that the breaking change is a
rather small one, unless I'm missing something.

~~~
capableweb
> I appreciate the commitment to semver

There is no commitment to semver from SBCL's side. Rather, it's trying to
follow calendar years with at least one release each of the 11 months and a
major release in the end of the year.

~~~
simias
Uh, I take it back then. I get this versioning scheme for something that don't
have a reasonably application for semver like an operating system for
instance, but a programming language? I don't really see the point. If you go
that way you might as well tag it "SBCL 2020" or something like that to make
it clear.

But I suppose that's pure bikeshedding and it doesn't really matter.

~~~
reikonomusha
SBCL is an implementation. The programming language Common Lisp is set in
stone by a standard.

~~~
nerdponx
Does that matter? SBCL includes a lot of nonstandard extensions.

~~~
reikonomusha
It matters a lot. But the extensions are important and warrant compatibility
tracking.

