[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Any complete CL implementations??
- To: Rem @ MIT-MC.ARPA
- Subject: Any complete CL implementations??
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
- Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1985 03:26:00 -0000
- Cc: COMMON-LISP@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: Msg of 5 Apr 1985 15:24-EST from Rem at IMSSS
- Sender: FAHLMAN@CMU-CS-C.ARPA
Our CMU version of Common Lisp on the Perq is essentially complete
except for complex numbers. These have now been coded, and will
probably be added to our system this week. By "essentially complete", I
mean that nothing big is missing, though from time to time we discover
that something has slipped through the cracks. CCASE and CTYPECASE are
still among the missing, I think. I cannot claim that our system is
believed to be a 100% complete and correct implementation. A number of
bugs have been discovered and not yet fixed, and the whole system is in
need of a systematic testing.
A number of companies have started with our code and have had a lot more
manpower for testing and fixing, so I wouldn't be surprised if a number
of implementations are as complete as ours and a good deal more
polished. There is not much reason for anyone following this route to
end up with a less-than-complete Common Lisp -- once the basics are up,
we can hand them the code for the rest. It is usually the
implementations that try to bend some existing Lisp into a Common Lisp
that end up stuck at 90% compatibility.