Hi Tomas, > Alex Gilding <[email protected]> writes: > > Is there any kind of established definition of what specifically > > constitutes the PicoLisp language? i.e. what must, and what should, a > > third party Lisp implementation provide in order to be able to call > > itself a PicoLisp? > ... > The only definition for picolisp is whatever Alex thinks it's picolisp.
Nono. I'm not the owner of PicoLisp, just the discoverer. What I probably meant with the "pure" language is everything which deals with plain Lisp data like symbols and lists -- as opposed to the "system" dependent parts like I/O, networking, process control etc. In this aspect, mini, ersatz, the C and the assembler versions of PicoLisp should all be compatible. A major difference, though, is that mini supports only small numbers. > For Alex, the data representation described in one of the text files in > the repository is the core idea of picolisp. The rest is mostly > examples. Right. It is the "structures" file in the "doc/" directories. Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe
