RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom common lisp

[Weiss, Juergen]

Sorry that I was so harsh. Your answer was mainly to C Y,
to me only as a CC, but I kind of took it as directed to
me. Email communication is tricky ;-)

Regards 

Juergen Weiss

Juergen Weiss     | Universitaet Mainz, Zentrum fuer Datenverarbeitung,
address@hidden| 55099 Mainz, Tel: +49(6131)39-26361, FAX:
+49(6131)39-26407
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: root [mailto:address@hidden 
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 6:44 PM
> To: Weiss, Juergen
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; 
> address@hidden; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom common lisp
> 
> > Have done it 2 years ago. I won't do it again.
> > 
> > Juergen Weiss
> 
> sigh. ok. it appears you feel slighted because your ansi patches
> didn't get added to the system 2 years ago.
> 
> three years ago gcl was chosen (over ccl) because (a) i knew it worked
> on akcl (gcl's parent code) and (b) i helped write akcl so i knew the
> internals. (c) there were not many ansi common lisps and, in fact, i
> didn't understand the distinction between cltl2 and ansi.
> 
> two years ago the interpreter was not yet fully functional on gcl. in
> fact, it was in the process of being converted to pamphlet files with
> a makefile hierarchy. supporting 2 different lisps in the makefiles
> was more work than i could do and a complete rewrite to ansi lisp (on
> an ansi lisp i didn't understand) was too much work for me to do. the
> point was to get ALL of axiom running. email discussions on the lisp
> pointed out that gcl would eventually be ansi. uffi didn't exist and
> i didn't understand the way to hook the C socket code into your work.
> 
> axiom became fully functional (interp/algebra/hyperdoc/ graphics) as
> of feb 2005. at which point i could begin to focus on other issues.
> 
> rewriting the code from the current boot language to ansi common lisp
> is in process and i'm testing the rewrite on every available ansi
> common lisp platform during the rewrite. so ansi common lisp is 
> coming. not quickly but in well-tested increments.
> 
> i know i ignored your ansi patches but they happened at a time when
> they would have been vastly disruptive to getting the system running
> again. 
> 
> i apologize that they were ignored.
> 
> t
> 
> 
>