Hi Denis,

> I have finally tried yesterday miniPicolisp (which might actually be all I
> need). It seems, that some functions like sub? or hash have not been 
> implemented
> yet while (all) says their symbols are present (On the other hand, later is 
> also
> included in this list which does not match the specs (actually its value is
> NIL).

This happens because these symbols are referred to somewhere. As you may know,
Lisp symbols simply spring into existence when needed.

For example, 'later' appears in the 'pretty' function in "src/lib.s"

   ((memq (car X) '(=: use later recur tab new))

as a copy of the original 'pretty' in full PicoLisp. So this could in fact be
cleared up.


> I do not know whether miniPicolisp has just been an experiment or aims to be a
> serious project, but in the later case, such functions (sub?, hash,...) will 
> be

It may indeed be useful in embedded systems. I think some people use it.


> useful, because even if there is no utf-8 support, as far as I know (please
> correct me, if I am wrong), many utf-8 string processing can be done at byte
> level.

Yes, should be possible using the numeric representation of the characters. But
rather tedious I suspect.

♪♫ Alex

-- 
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to