From: Kent M Pitman <pit...@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Discussion of Lisp implementations?
Date: 1999/03/19
Message-ID: <sfwk8wduazf.fsf@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 456420145
Sender: pit...@world.std.com (Kent M Pitman)
References: <w4or9qrju8t.fsf@nemesis.irtnog.org> <ydu2vm5gqj.fsf@CLYDE.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU> <w4o7lshs6e9.fsf@nemesis.irtnog.org>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

"His Holiness the Reverend Doktor Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated" <xenop...@irtnog.org> writes:

> C language and the C standard library.  With Lisp, so much of the
> language *is* the standard library that it makes identifying
> primitives very difficult.

Why not just implement the special forms and the system classes?
They're plainly identified in the specification, and they're not much
of the language.  I just don't see the problem.

If you're working from some other document than the language
specification, that's probably your problem.

http://www.harlequin.com/education/books/HyperSpec/

you can download a copy for local use.

The first 5 chapters of the specification are all you have to dig through.
Ignore the rest and come back to it after you're done with the rest.

The copious library stuff is in later chapters, plainly separated.