<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
  <title>comp.lang.lisp Google Group</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp</link>
  <description>Discussion about LISP.</description>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
  <title>Re: simulating local lexical variables with symbol macros</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/2f69afdd53f9e8a3/3614bde9dad3881a?show_docid=3614bde9dad3881a</link>
  <description>
  C is, never the less, the one common factor that will hit all of those &lt;br&gt; targets. The other languages that you&#39;re considering (Perl and Python) &lt;br&gt; work because they&#39;re interpreted by a portable C program. &lt;br&gt; So: you could try other languages that are either implemented by C &lt;br&gt; interpreters (Perl, Python, ruby, LUA, CLISP, many of the schemes) or
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/2f69afdd53f9e8a3/3614bde9dad3881a?show_docid=3614bde9dad3881a</guid>
  <author>
  areilly...@bigpond.net.au
  (Andrew Reilly)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 22:54:30 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Symbol macros don&#39;t capture their lexical environments?</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/a0d92ec639ed1db6/f03296c8d0cdcc27?show_docid=f03296c8d0cdcc27</link>
  <description>
  In article &lt;br&gt; &amp;lt;496f4d65-e0ab-4079-9cdb-f14ac 8092...@j9g2000prh.googlegroup s.com&amp;gt;, &lt;br&gt; Hm... this is getting awfully Zen. &lt;br&gt; It seems to me that this all hinges on how broadly one interprets the &lt;br&gt; definition of &amp;quot;binding&amp;quot;. That definition is &amp;quot;an association between a &lt;br&gt; name and that which the name denotes.&amp;quot; So if one were to interpret this
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/a0d92ec639ed1db6/f03296c8d0cdcc27?show_docid=f03296c8d0cdcc27</guid>
  <author>
  rnospa...@flownet.com
  (Ron Garret)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 22:12:34 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: new lisp book</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/784e2ad8f734fb8b/92dfb7359a9bd733?show_docid=92dfb7359a9bd733</link>
  <description>
  If amazon gets a cut of the sale then I believe they aren&#39;t necessarily being taken for a ride. The &lt;br&gt; unsuspecting customer, on the other hand.... &lt;br&gt; Rui Maciel
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/784e2ad8f734fb8b/92dfb7359a9bd733?show_docid=92dfb7359a9bd733</guid>
  <author>
  rui.mac...@gmail.com
  (Rui Maciel)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 21:39:24 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: new lisp book</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/784e2ad8f734fb8b/95cf8d1982ce4911?show_docid=95cf8d1982ce4911</link>
  <description>
  Fraud appears to be a very profitable line of business. &lt;br&gt; Rui Maciel
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/784e2ad8f734fb8b/95cf8d1982ce4911?show_docid=95cf8d1982ce4911</guid>
  <author>
  rui.mac...@gmail.com
  (Rui Maciel)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 21:19:38 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: new lisp book</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/784e2ad8f734fb8b/cda6809c45c123a7?show_docid=cda6809c45c123a7</link>
  <description>
  It appears that the alphascript publishing company doesn&#39;t hide the fact that their books are wikipedia &lt;br&gt; ripoffs. Taken from their site[1]: &lt;br&gt; &amp;lt;site&amp;gt; &lt;br&gt; Q: …do all of Alphascript’s books take their content from Wikipedia? &lt;br&gt; Alphascript: Yes, since we believe that the quality of the Wikipedia-articles is so good that it is
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/784e2ad8f734fb8b/cda6809c45c123a7?show_docid=cda6809c45c123a7</guid>
  <author>
  rui.mac...@gmail.com
  (Rui Maciel)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 21:18:51 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Different behavior of SBCL and CLISP on &#39;directory&#39; function</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/94a42c44bbde23ab/ba872ebee06a3365?show_docid=ba872ebee06a3365</link>
  <description>
  But &#39;erroneously&#39;. &amp;quot;systems/*.*&amp;quot; is a file pathname, so you should &lt;br&gt; get only files (from the point of view of Common Lisp; of course, from &lt;br&gt; the point of view if unix, directories are files, hence the behavior &lt;br&gt; of SBCL). &lt;br&gt; Try: (append (directory &amp;quot;systems/*/&amp;quot;) (directory &amp;quot;systems/*.*/&amp;quot;)) &lt;br&gt; if you want both directories with and without dots, or just:
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/94a42c44bbde23ab/ba872ebee06a3365?show_docid=ba872ebee06a3365</guid>
  <author>
  p...@informatimago.com
  (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 21:03:20 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Different behavior of SBCL and CLISP on &#39;directory&#39; function</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/94a42c44bbde23ab/d6d28dbe07ba7a9a?show_docid=d6d28dbe07ba7a9a</link>
  <description>
  Pathnames are deliberately underspecified in CLHS. CL-FAD offers some &lt;br&gt; layer of compatibility: &lt;br&gt; CL-USER&amp;gt; (documentation &#39;cl-fad:list-directory &#39;function) &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;Returns a fresh list of pathnames corresponding to the truenames of &lt;br&gt; all files within the directory named by the non-wild pathname &lt;br&gt; designator DIRNAME. The pathnames of sub-directories are returned in
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/94a42c44bbde23ab/d6d28dbe07ba7a9a?show_docid=d6d28dbe07ba7a9a</guid>
  <author>
  stha...@test123.ltd.pl
  (Stanislaw Halik)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 19:28:22 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Different behavior of SBCL and CLISP on &#39;directory&#39; function</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/94a42c44bbde23ab/114ac94226eb2345?show_docid=114ac94226eb2345</link>
  <description>
  Hello! &lt;br&gt; I&#39;ve got different behavior on sbcl and clisp in the following &lt;br&gt; situation. I have a simple directory structure: &lt;br&gt; . &lt;br&gt; ./systems/s-xml &lt;br&gt; ./systems/cl-gd &lt;br&gt; ./systems/cdg &lt;br&gt; Now, I want to get all files/directories under systems. &lt;br&gt; In sbcl, i do (directory &amp;quot;systems/*.*&amp;quot;) and I get what I want. &lt;br&gt; In clisp, i do the same, and I get nil. I also tried to construct the
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/94a42c44bbde23ab/114ac94226eb2345?show_docid=114ac94226eb2345</guid>
  <author>
  kazenni...@gmail.com
  (Anton Kazennikov)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 19:19:28 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: simulating local lexical variables with symbol macros</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/2f69afdd53f9e8a3/7a6215f1341ed1f8?show_docid=7a6215f1341ed1f8</link>
  <description>
  Yes, ruby would be interesting. I think I only need to deal with &lt;br&gt; Unicode in the sense that I&#39;m (again, pragmatically) expecting &lt;br&gt; configuration files which are XML and the parse of these might &lt;br&gt; therefore throw Unicode at me by the nature of XML However I don&#39;t &lt;br&gt; think I need to worry about that too much.
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/2f69afdd53f9e8a3/7a6215f1341ed1f8?show_docid=7a6215f1341ed1f8</guid>
  <author>
  t...@cley.com
  (Tim Bradshaw)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 19:15:30 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Symbol macros don&#39;t capture their lexical environments?</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/a0d92ec639ed1db6/dd826eec14f55f7f?show_docid=dd826eec14f55f7f</link>
  <description>
  You&#39;re welcome. &lt;br&gt; Not at all; it takes a lot of serious thought to fight the urge toward &lt;br&gt; hyperbole. It also takes a lot of serious thought to ask an &lt;br&gt; unanswerable question, in order to get people to think about what &lt;br&gt; they&#39;re assuming. &lt;br&gt;  Let me put my question more &lt;br&gt; You may get squeamish if someone starts bleeding, and your first
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/a0d92ec639ed1db6/dd826eec14f55f7f?show_docid=dd826eec14f55f7f</guid>
  <author>
  du...@franz.com
  (Duane Rettig)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 19:14:39 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Clozure and Clojure</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/174b59d3f3798ba0/b4390c4752eb7b43?show_docid=b4390c4752eb7b43</link>
  <description>
  In article &amp;lt;he91v6$ck...@news.eternal-sep tember.org&amp;gt;, &lt;br&gt; Raffael Cavallaro &amp;lt;raffaelcavall...@pas.espam.s. il.vous.plait.mac.com&amp;gt; &lt;br&gt; wrote: &lt;br&gt; AFAIK you got it exactly right. &lt;br&gt; rg
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/174b59d3f3798ba0/b4390c4752eb7b43?show_docid=b4390c4752eb7b43</guid>
  <author>
  rnospa...@flownet.com
  (Ron Garret)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 18:20:51 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Symbol macros don&#39;t capture their lexical environments?</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/a0d92ec639ed1db6/67279a4b2609ec1d?show_docid=67279a4b2609ec1d</link>
  <description>
  In article &lt;br&gt; &amp;lt;d3d917c1-e992-4a86-b6ea-fa3c1 d08a...@h40g2000prf.googlegrou ps.com&amp;gt;, &lt;br&gt; Thanks for taking the time to respond, I really appreciate it. But I &lt;br&gt; think that answer is a little facile, particularly in light of the HCF &lt;br&gt; hyperbole that you yourself brought up. Let me put my question more &lt;br&gt; precisely: why should leaking compiler information in response to a
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/a0d92ec639ed1db6/67279a4b2609ec1d?show_docid=67279a4b2609ec1d</guid>
  <author>
  rnospa...@flownet.com
  (Ron Garret)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 18:16:31 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Remembering information during compilation</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/460e44871936c99c/a032547b58f52195?show_docid=a032547b58f52195</link>
  <description>
  You&#39;d have to figure out how to implement this in your macroexpand-all &lt;br&gt; function. Ultimately, this function will be implemented by calling &lt;br&gt; either macroexpand or macroexpand-1 at various times. The issue of &lt;br&gt; wether to macroexpand a special-form is a hard one, and one that &lt;br&gt; should be examined carefully at a lower level than the level you to
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/460e44871936c99c/a032547b58f52195?show_docid=a032547b58f52195</guid>
  <author>
  du...@franz.com
  (Duane Rettig)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 17:42:45 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Remembering information during compilation</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/460e44871936c99c/59dccb8f28fa2a27?show_docid=59dccb8f28fa2a27</link>
  <description>
  I was of course referring to the interaction between multithreading &lt;br&gt; and lexical bindings. *That* is not covered by the standard. &lt;br&gt; Which brings us back to what I ask above: Is there any established &lt;br&gt; way for how such parallel expansion/compilation is supposed to work ? &lt;br&gt; To put it otherwise you&#39;re saying that my code violates some rules
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/460e44871936c99c/59dccb8f28fa2a27?show_docid=59dccb8f28fa2a27</guid>
  <author>
  spi...@gmail.com
  (Spiros Bousbouras)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 16:03:19 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
  <title>Re: Clozure and Clojure</title>
  <link>http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/174b59d3f3798ba0/1afcf39001e81929?show_docid=1afcf39001e81929</link>
  <description>
  Largely, yes. They both stem from the same pun on &amp;quot;closure.&amp;quot; &lt;br&gt; Mikel Evins? :^) &lt;br&gt; (Mikel works for Clozure Associates, the source of Clozure Common &lt;br&gt; Lisp, and he has also written a fair amount of Clojure code, &lt;br&gt; specifically, a very flexible generic function system for clojure). &lt;br&gt; Seriously, Clozure Associates is descended from the group that did the
  </description>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/174b59d3f3798ba0/1afcf39001e81929?show_docid=1afcf39001e81929</guid>
  <author>
  raffaelcavall...@pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com
  (Raffael Cavallaro)
  </author>
  <pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2009 15:45:42 UT
</pubDate>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
