On 3/26/10 11:44 AM, Robert Dodier wrote:
> On 3/26/10, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> A general question: How much should we cater to broken Lisp
>> implementations?
>>
> I'd like to say broken implementations are someone else;s
> problem but that's not really true, since the user sees the
> incorrect behavior as a bug in Maxima. So I'd say go ahead
> and try to cope with implementation-specific bugs as time
> and interest permit.
>
I also think broken implementations are someone else's problem, but I
also agree (sort of) to cope with these.
For the problem at hand, it's quite easy.
> I'm dreaming of a distant future time when one Lisp implementation
> will crush the others with its irrefutable combination of correctness,
> speed, portability, and clever artwork; sort of a "twilight of the gods"
> situation. Then we'll make one final CVS commit to strip out the
> #+foocl's for all the vanquished implementations and raise high our
> drinking horns to heartily toast the One True Lisp.
>
Yuck.
Ray