First, I'd like to thank everyone who replied to my query concerning Utah
Lisp. As promised, here are the results of the query:
Utah Lisp is a very old (the manuals are dated 1978, thank you R. Lynch),
mainframe version of a Standard Lisp. It would be fairly rare for someone
to run across it today, so it probably does not bear mention in the FAQ.
(I stumbled across it on our mainframe here at UKCC quite by accident.)
According to John Fitch, one of its developers, there were several versions:
IBM 360/370, DEC 10, Univac, and Burroughs among others. From what I have
gleaned, it was an update or an improved version of something begun at
Stanford and completed at Utah, hence the name Utah Lisp. (This also helps
to explain why the documentation here is for "Lisp/360" and was published
by the SCIP at Stanford.--Perhaps our docs are even more out of date than
our Lisp :-)
Once again, thanks to all who helped, and I don't think I'll be using this
for development, though it might be neat to see if I can make the system
crash :-)
+---------------------------------+
| Jason Stephenson |
| ········@ukcc.uky.edu |
+---------------------------------+
I was under the impression that Utah Lisp was a version of Lisp/360.
In article <···················@ukcc.uky.edu> ········@ukcc.uky.edu writes:
>Utah Lisp is a very old (the manuals are dated 1978, thank you R. Lynch),
>mainframe version of a Standard Lisp. It would be fairly rare for someone
>to run across it today, so it probably does not bear mention in the FAQ.
>(I stumbled across it on our mainframe here at UKCC quite by accident.)
I'm sorry. I don't think that this is right.
>According to John Fitch, one of its developers, there were several versions:
>IBM 360/370, DEC 10, Univac, and Burroughs among others. From what I have
>gleaned, it was an update or an improved version of something begun at
>Stanford and completed at Utah, hence the name Utah Lisp. (This also helps
>to explain why the documentation here is for "Lisp/360" and was published
>by the SCIP at Stanford.--Perhaps our docs are even more out of date than
>our Lisp :-)
If Utah Lisp was Lisp/360 (as I thought when this came up, but I kept waiting
for someone else to answer), then it was *not* Standard Lisp.
I used Lisp/360 at the University of Chicago about 15 years ago. It's an
EVALQUOTE Lisp, pretty much a Lisp 1.5.
I also used Standard Lisp, because we were installing the REDUCE2 package on
our academic DEC-20. This was an EVAL Lisp.
Somewhere in the files I still have the _Standard Lisp Report_ from the Utah
folks; I'll see if I can dig it up and see what the bibliography says about its
predecessors.
I'll also ask over on alt.folklore.computers, to see if anyone over there
remembers more than I.
--
Rich Alderson You know the sort of thing that you can find in any dictionary
of a strange language, and which so excites the amateur philo-
logists, itching to derive one tongue from another that they
know better: a word that is nearly the same in form and meaning
as the corresponding word in English, or Latin, or Hebrew, or
what not.
--J. R. R. Tolkien,
········@netcom.com _The Notion Club Papers_
In article <··········@midge.bath.ac.uk> ······@midge.bath.ac.uk (J P Fitch) writes:
>
>There was an EVALQUOTE lisp called Lisp/360 which was used at Utah in the
>1970s; it came from Stanford and had been heavily modified by Kevin Kay.
As it happens, I was re-packing files over the weekend and ran across the
manual for Stanford LISP/360 and the addendum for the Utah modifications over
the weekend, as well as the Standard Lisp docs.
>Dispite what Richard Anderson says, there was a Standard LISP for IBM 360
^
It's an "L".
>based on the same code, and renamed SLISP/360. It was an EVAL system.
>The reason I know is because I did some of the modifications after Kevin
>left Utah. I used it sebsequnetly at Leeds, and in my archives I still
>have the source. Also 2 Japanese, Kanada-san and a student I think,
>transcribed this SLISP/360 into Motorola 68K assembler, and got it to
>run!
> It had a number of terrible features, but it did support REDUCE.
We only put up REDUCE on the DEC-20 at Chicago; a competing system called
SPEAKEZ ran on the Amdahl 470. Thus, we never ran Standard Lisp on the latter.
I suspect, though, to get back to the original poster's question, that the LISP
he found was not Standard Lisp but the predecessor.
--
Rich Alderson You know the sort of thing that you can find in any dictionary
of a strange language, and which so excites the amateur philo-
logists, itching to derive one tongue from another that they
know better: a word that is nearly the same in form and meaning
as the corresponding word in English, or Latin, or Hebrew, or
what not.
--J. R. R. Tolkien,
········@netcom.com _The Notion Club Papers_