Why not define a subset of CL? (and request for recorded talks)

[Ian Tegebo]

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: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/sicl-devel/attachments/20160418/a5bc994f/attachment.html>