[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Common Lisp 2000
- To: jeff%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK
- Subject: Re: Common Lisp 2000
- From: NGALL@G.BBN.COM
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1986 03:35:00 -0000
- Cc: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU, common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Cc: eulisp%inria.uucp@CS.UCL.AC.UK
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: NGALL@G.BBN.COM
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 86 14:39:41 -0100
From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
To: Fahlman@c.cs.cmu.edu, snyder <@hplabs.hp.com:snyder@hplsny>
Subject: Common Lisp 2000
How do people feel about making changes like immutable/mutable whatevers
part of the ANSI/ISO standard instead of waiting for Common Lisp 2000?
I don't mean this particular change, which after all we might decide we
don't want at all, but rather changes of this magnitude. The EuLisp
proposals for the ISO standard do contain suggestions on this scale.
I'd rather see our limited resources spent on trying to get what we
have into clear and consistent shape, so that we will really be able
to call CL a standard.