From ian.tegebo at gmail.com Tue Apr 19 02:46:22 2016 From: ian.tegebo at gmail.com (Ian Tegebo) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:46:22 -0700 Subject: Why not define a subset of CL? (and request for recorded talks) Message-ID: On https://github.com/robert-strandh/SICL, it mentions: "We have made no attempt to define a subset of Common Lisp that is enough to build each module." I'm curious about the rationale. Naively, one would expect that a minimal subset would facilitate the use of modules by requiring less from an implementation. The introduction to the specification document states that "[...] lower layers use as few primitives as possible [...]". Is this to mean that while *some* subset is in use, one is not made explicit for purposes of say, design flexibility or some such? As an aside, I wonder if any talks on SICL have been recorded. All I could find was some notes, http://www.cipht.net/2014/08/19/ilc2014.html#orgheadline21 I don't suppose there's a recording to go along with the ILC 2014 slides? -- Ian Tegebo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: