[cdr-discuss] Re: ECLM and ELS 2013 -- CDR Meeting?

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Nick Levine <ndl at ravenbrook.com> writes:

>> From: Marco Antoniotti <marcoxa at cs.nyu.edu>
>> Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 23:17:46 +0200
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> so, is there any interest in making a CDR BoF at ECLM or ELS?  I
>> have a few ideas about a (short) list of topics for discussion.
>
> I am curious about how many CDRs have been implemented in how many
> lisps over the last seven years. This information may not be easily
> available, but anything that anyone knows will be interesting.


There's no CDR about it, but there's an informal convention that when a
CDR is implemented, a keyword :CDRn is pushed onto *features*.  We
should probably write a CDR about it. 

If we rely on it, then only one CDR is implemented on only one
implementation.


clall -r  '(list (lisp-implementation-type) (find-if (lambda (x) (string= "CDR" x :end2 (min 3 (length (string x))))) *features*))'

Armed Bear Common Lisp         --> ("Armed Bear Common Lisp" :CDR6)
Clozure Common Lisp            --> ("Clozure Common Lisp" NIL)
CLISP                          --> ("CLISP" NIL)
CMU Common Lisp                --> ("CMU Common Lisp" NIL)
ECL                            --> ("ECL" NIL)
SBCL                           --> ("SBCL" NIL)



But actually, AFAIK, all the CDR defined so far can be implemented as 
libraries.


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
You can take the lisper out of the lisp job, but you can't take the lisp out
of the lisper (; -- antifuchs