Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!festival!edcogsci!usenet
From: tfb@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Tim Bradshaw)
Subject: Re: CMU Common Lisp 17f
In-Reply-To: marcoxa@mosaic.nyu.edu's message of 10 Nov 1994 14:17:31 GMT
Message-ID: <TFB.94Nov13235617@burns.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: burns
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh
References: <39csqq$l3d@cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu> <TFB.94Nov8170740@macbeth.c
	ogsci.ed.ac.uk> <MARCOXA.94Nov10091731@mosaic.nyu.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 1994 23:56:17 GMT
Lines: 24

* Marco Antoniotti wrote:
> (Tim Bradshaw) writes:
[about  BUILT-IN-CLASS, CLASS-NAME, CLASS-OF and FIND-CLASS]
>    Can someone explain what the difference between PCL's versions of
>    these fns and the ones that come from COMMON-LISP?

> PCL is (now - I know it stands originally for Portable Common Loops)
> an implementation of CLOS. Hence it is COMMON LISP. The
> "reimplementation" of PCL done in CMUCL has some different features.

I think there is some confusion here: I was referring to the specific
package names, not to PCL or Common Lisp as conceptual entities!

My problem is very specific: the functions above are defined in the
PCL package and the COMMON-LISP package.  The definitions are
(evidently) not the same since the two versions of CLASS-OF can return
different objects in some cases.  I can `fix' the problem by
unexporting the PCL versions in order to be able to get the MOP stuff
without packages, but I am worried since they do return different
results, and I think they shouldn't!

I suppose I need to read the source.

--tim
