Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!peer-news.britain.eu.net!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: ISO/IEC CD 13816 -- ISLisp
Message-ID: <DKo8K9.M0n.0.macbeth@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK
References: <4b35de$ilh@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> <MAD.95Dec21172105@tanzanite.math.keio.ac.jp> <19951222T000223Z_-_@arcana.naggum.no>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 19:24:09 GMT
Lines: 28

In article <19951222T000223Z_-_@arcana.naggum.no> Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> writes:
>
>|   Do you mean you want single standard, instead of several parallel
>|   standards (as we have now)?
>
>I'm curious which "several parallel standards" you mean.  is it IEEE Scheme
>and ANSI Common Lisp?  as far as I'm concerned, that's one, single standard
>for _each_ of those languages.  in this sense, I already have what I want.
>
>|   Then that's what ISLisp is intended to be.
>
>do you mean that ISLisp will cause IEEE Scheme and ANSI Common Lisp to go
>away?  that's an amazing attitude.

That is not what ISLisp is for.  It's another language in the Lisp
family (along with CL and Scheme), not a standard for all of Lisp.

>when Unicode was marketed at the heaviest, they also clamored on about how
>Unicode would be the new "single standard, instead of several parallel
>standards" for character representation.

Also?  There's no clamoring on about ISLisp being a new, single
standard.  There's just one news article from one person who seems
to be under a mistaken impression.

-- jd


