4 ms·
Skimming the table of contents you can see how this led directly to the Common Lisp specification. CL is a successful narrowing of LM; all the chapters that did
by mahmud 12y ago
Skimming the table of contents you can see how this led directly to the Common Lisp specification. CL is a successful narrowing of LM; all the chapters that didn't make the cut appear to be outdated cruft, or outside the scope of a portable standard, and currently either unnecessary, or provided by a shim 3rd party library. Well done, CL standardization committee!
- rjsw 12y agoThe version of Lisp Machine Lisp documented in this manual implements Common Lisp. Have a look at version 4 or 5 (on bitsavers) to get a feel for the precursor Lisp.
- lispm 12y ago> The version of Lisp Machine Lisp (LML) documented in this manual implements Common Lisp. Not exactly. There is both Common Lisp and Lisp Machine Lisp. LML is the default language, but one can tell it to use CL. One can als call functions back and forth. They are two different Lisp dialects side by side. Example: There is the LML DEFSTRUCT and the Common Lisp version CLI:DEFSTRUCT. Later Symbolics made Symbolics Common Lisp and made it the default dialect on the machine. It then also supported Zetalisp (aka Lisp Machine Lisp), CLTL1 and some kind of ANSI COMMON Lisp.