From: Barry Margolin <bar...@bbnplanet.com>
Subject: Re: Discussion of Lisp implementations?
Date: 1999/03/15
Message-ID: <TleH2.241$p4.111877@burlma1-snr2>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 455351996
Distribution: world
References: <w4or9qrju8t.fsf@nemesis.irtnog.org>
X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Complaints-To: abuse@gtei.net
X-Trace: MTcgTm9BdXRoVXNlciBvZmZpY2UtcmVhZGVycyA0LoguMzIuOTcgIE1vbiwgMTUgTWFyIDGbOTkg!MjCYNDeYNDcgR01U
Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA
X-Copies-To: never
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:47:47 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Originator: bar...@bbnplanet.com (Barry Margolin)

In article <w4or9qrju8t....@nemesis.irtnog.org>,
His Holiness the Reverend Doktor Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated <xenop...@irtnog.org> wrote:
>A lot of the traffic on this newsgroup centers around ANSI Common
>Lisp, that is, interpreting the language specification, or how to go
>about using the language.  Would it be on-topic to ask questions about
>how Common Lisp could be implemented?

Practically anything about Lisp is on-topic.  There are a few specific
areas where there are more appropriate groups (e.g. you'll get better
answers about Emacs Lisp in the Emacs newsgroups, and about Autolisp in the
CAD newsgroup), but just about everything else is fine here.

-- 
Barry Margolin, bar...@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.