🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8440@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM> toma@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy) writes:

>I have spend many hours going over the listings, fixing bugs, and making
>extensions.

From email, I understand a number of other people have also done (or
are doing) significant work on xlisp.  Plus, it has been suggested
that David Betz has dropped xlisp in favor of working on xscheme.

Is there any interest in coordinating work on xlisp, or is everybody
determined to have My Very Own Xlisp?  Sticking my neck out a bit
here, I'd be willing to try maintaining a merged version, provided the
result could be distributed under winterp-style (i.e., *very* relaxed)
copyright, and that the result stayed within my understanding of the
spirit of xlisp -- simple, small and portable. (No point in re-inventing
AKCL, say -- it already exists.)  E.g., really big function libraries
should be compilation options rather than mandatory.

If a *real* xlisp guru wants to take on the task, that's even better,
of course...
--
     jsp@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Jeff Prothero)
     jsp@u.washington.edu (If above bounces.)
     Biological Structure Graphics Lab, U Washington