I have just come across islisp. Can somebody explain to me, what islisp is?
If I understand it correctly, after CL was created and standadized by ANSI,
ISO, which may be a different commitee, thought they would create a new
standard and so islisp was born. But why did they do this? Is islisp a
minimal CL?
TIA,
J.B.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
"Janos Blazi" <······@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<·············@news.newsgroups.com>...
> I have just come across islisp. Can somebody explain to me, what islisp is?
You mean, can someone do it better than the materials you can download from here?
http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG16/open/standard.html
Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> "Janos Blazi" <······@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<·············@news.newsgroups.com>...
>> I have just come across islisp. Can somebody explain to
>> me, what islisp is?
>
> You mean, can someone do it better than the materials you
> can download from here?
>
> http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG16/open/standard.html
I had read that, but I was interested in the story behind
the story. By the way: Have you found OKI Lisp?
--
JB
"Janos Blazi" <······@hotmail.com> writes:
> I have just come across islisp. Can somebody explain to me, what islisp is?
ISLISP is another standardized variant of Lisp.
> If I understand it correctly, after CL was created and standadized by ANSI,
> ISO, which may be a different commitee, thought they would create a new
> standard and so islisp was born. But why did they do this?
Neither ISO nor ANSI take the initiative in creating standards. When a
group of people want to get together and create a standard about
something, they can do so under ANSI or ISO rules and when these
procedures are followed correctly the end result is an ANSI or ISO
standard. ISLISP was a predominantly European endeavour that took a
lot of ideas from the Eulisp community.
> Is islisp a minimal CL?
ISLISP is smaller and reasonably CL compatible. But I don't understand
your term 'minimal CL'. Obviously, the minimal CL is CL itself.
--
When they ran out of ships, they used guns. When they ran out of guns,
they used knives and sticks and bare hands. They did this for two
years. They never ran out of courage. But in the end, they ran out of
time. B5 --- In the Beginning
Lieven Marchand <···@wyrd.be> writes:
> "Janos Blazi" <······@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > I have just come across islisp. Can somebody explain to me, what islisp is?
>
> ISLISP is another standardized variant of Lisp.
>
> > If I understand it correctly, after CL was created and standadized by ANSI,
> > ISO, which may be a different commitee, thought they would create a new
> > standard and so islisp was born. But why did they do this?
>
> Neither ISO nor ANSI take the initiative in creating standards. When a
> group of people want to get together and create a standard about
> something, they can do so under ANSI or ISO rules and when these
> procedures are followed correctly the end result is an ANSI or ISO
> standard. ISLISP was a predominantly European endeavour that took a
> lot of ideas from the Eulisp community.
As a technical matter, I'd personally say (i.e., "just my opinion")
ISLISP resembles CL more than Eulisp, although there is influence of
both.
ISLISP is an international effort. If it seems "predominantly European"
this is only because Europe, in forming the EC, has had the good sense
not to give up the nation status of each of its states, and so still has
a lot of votes in ISO. Had the US states been left as countries in such
a looseknit coalition, it would have seemed like a US effort since I think
more US states were involved than European countries. ;)
(Besides, Japan was a major player, too.)
In a consensus body, it is simply inappropriate to try to characterize
the result as belonging to one nation or another. In the end, there was
a lot of voting by country, but the actual design was, ultimately, a
cooperative effort. We had a few false starts but ultimately realized
that we were not going to reach any conclusion if we didn't all work
together and address each other's needs.
> > Is islisp a minimal CL?
>
> ISLISP is smaller and reasonably CL compatible. But I don't understand
> your term 'minimal CL'. Obviously, the minimal CL is CL itself.
I suspect the term Janos meant to ask about was 'subset'. ISLISP is
not a CL subset, but was negotiated in a way that it is what I'd call
"culturally compatible" with CL. That is, mostly its operators that
are same-named do the same thing (or a subset) of what CL does. Where
there was a divergence, we tried to name the operator differently so
that it wouldn't confuse people. They're both Lisp2. The type tree
has been constructed so that it could coreside with ANSI CL, even
though it uses different names for some classes than ANSI CL does.
It's about a tenth the size of ANSI CL (just over 100 pages instead of
just over 1000).
All of the above is just my personal opinion.
Kent M Pitman wrote:
[...]
Thx. When I asked this question, I could not reach lisp.org.
Later I read there that you were involved in the design and
this answered my questions.
(I am considering using OpenLisp in a (small) project of
mine. Another sensible possibility could be TISL but they
hav no documentation at the moment.)
--
JB
Kent M Pitman [writes in part]:
> ... ISLISP is
> not a CL subset, but was negotiated in a way that it is what I'd call
> "culturally compatible" with CL.
this is an excellent way to put it. it is a very good effort. guile
should have paid attention, if for no other reason than living upto
its name for a good trick... :]
oz
--
music is the space between the notes. -- claude debussy