[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Where Pure Common Lisp lives
- To: Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>, common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Subject: Where Pure Common Lisp lives
- From: David C. Plummer <DCP@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
- Date: Fri, 23 May 86 08:06 EDT
- In-reply-to: <FAHLMAN.12208858771.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
A nit pick on names: LOCAL is poor. What does LOCAL: mean to somebody
in California (pick a site) running an implementation developed in the
eastern US (pick a site)? VENDOR-EXTENSIONS: is more meaningful than
LOCAL:. SYMBOLICS-COMMON-LISP: (SCL:) is >much< more meaningful than
LOCAL:. I guess my question is: What is gained by agreeing on the
standard package for extensions. I know this came up 6 weeks ago, but I
don't think the issue was closed.