🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1405@well.UUCP> jjacobs@well.UUCP (Jeffrey Jacobs) writes:
>
>In  <137@utah-orion.UUCP>, Stan Sheb writes:
>
>>I have an implementation of 3-Lisp that used to work in PSL, but then
>>I translated it to Common Lisp, and as of yet have not gotten the
>>necessary readtable hacking to work yet
>
>So much for the wonderful portability of Common Lisp!

Common Lisp is not supposed to compatible with all other existing lisps.
CL is portable between different CL implementations. You have the 
same problems porting from lisp X to CL as from lisp X to any other 
lisp Y.

>
>To add another story about the wonders of porting to Common
>Lisp from a Local User's Group meeting of one of the Lisp Machine
>companies, "I ported a large program from Zeta-Lisp to Common
>Lisp.  After I had it almost working, I decided I'd had enough.  I
>wouldn't use the Common Lisp version".
>
>The person telling this story shall remain nameless, but definitely
>knows what s/he is doing...
>

I have ported a large program from FranzLisp to Common Lisp. No
problems at all. Got some bugs fixed in the original at the same
time, so in the new version works better. And it runs easy on the
Lambda (in CL-mode) so CL is indeed portable.


>...
>
>-Jeffrey M. Jacobs, CONSART Systems Inc.
>P.O. Box 3016, Manhattan Beach, CA
>CIS:75076,2603
>BIX:jeffjacobs


-- 
Per-Erik Martin,  Computing Science Dep., Uppsala University, Sweden
UUCP: martin@kuling.UUCP  (...!{seismo,mcvax}!enea!kuling!martin)