On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:34:23PM +0000, Loyall, David wrote:
> This is a guess: the original asker is more familiar with Common Lisp than 
> picolisp.
> 
> So, a fair answer would be to describe picolisp in terms that CL users are 
> familiar with.
> 
> Sorry, I'm not qualified to do that myself.  But, here are some notes for 
> others:
> 
> * picolisp is a VM and the mechanics of that VM aren't hidden from the 
> programmer--everthing is implementation specific.
> 
> * the picolisp implementations are first class citizens, the picolisp 
> language is second class.
> 
> * A CL specification exists and it is important.

Agreed to all :)

> (Is there a picolisp specification? Since I don't know, it probably isn't
> important...)

I would say there is: The files doc/structures64 and doc/ref.html



> * one implementation is canonical: amd64

Meanwhile, I feel, the arm64 implementation the is primary one.


> * picolisp was made mostly by one person.
> 
> * picolisp is small, light, and elegant.

T

♪♫ Alex

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

Reply via email to