[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
all symbols [and delayed mail]
- To: navajo!Common-Lispfirstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: all symbols [and delayed mail]
- From: email@example.com (Jon L White)
- Date: Sun, 12 Apr 87 16:55:48 PDT
[The following message was sent when the "775 LISP symbols" was a hot
topic. Unfortunately, the gateway at navajo.stanford.edu seems to be
a bit recalcitrant -- a problem suffered all too often.]
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 87 17:33:35 PST
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <navajo!MAILER-DAEMON>
Subject: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
----- Transcript of session follows -----
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from bhopal.edsel.com by edsel.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA01258; Tue, 7 Apr 87 14:10:20 pst
Received: by bhopal.edsel.com (3.2/SMI-3.2)
id AA25834; Tue, 7 Apr 87 15:06:28 PDT
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 87 15:06:28 PDT
From: edsel!bhopal!jonl (Jon L White)
In-Reply-To: navajo!smh@EMS.MEDIA.MIT.EDU's message of Tue, 7 Apr 87 11:31:13 EST
Subject: all symbols
I don't think SIZE belongs in the Lisp package -- it isn't one of the
symbols mentioned in CLtL, p160, as optimization qualities. Perhaps
it is a Franz extension?
As to how it came about that Symbolics has 775 symbols: it occured
nearly a year ago, before the Franz-circulated list I believe, as a
consequence of a cooperative effort between Symbolics and Lucid.
I found the following msg header in my old mail file:
Date: Sun, 18 May 86 18:09 EDT
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <Navajo!DLW@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Subject: Orthodoxy in the package world layout.
Yes, it is certainly our intention that the CL package contain exactly
the documented external symbols, and we've tried hard to get it right.
Checking our set against your set is clearly an excellent cross-check.
In fact, I'm surprised none of us ever thought of it. I'm glad you did,
and thanks for doing the comparison. Now, lemme see what I can figure
out about these discrepencies and how to fix them.
. . .
-- JonL --