On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 11:51:28AM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > Please don't. > We already have the hyperspec available as a package. Adding cltl2 will > only confuse people as it describes a non-standard.
I understand your issue. And though the ANSI standard does differ from CLTL2, I personally find CLTL2 a useful guide for understanding some aspects of the Common Lisp language. My understanding of the viewpoints in the Common Lisp community is, of course, that the HyperSpec is the more definitive reference. But I also believe that many people consider CLTL2 to be an important and helpful book. Do you think this my belief reflects reality? Thanks for packaging the HyperSpec, I do refer to it often. > Maybe you could package one of the lisp tutorials online, or I seem to > remember that one of more of the books of Norvig or Graham became > liberated a while ago. Sure, I'll be glad to do that (OnLisp by Paul Graham). > At least provide strong language that the ANSI standard is the standard > and that the hyperspec is as close as you can get to it... That is a good idea. -- Kevin Rosenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kevin.rosenberg.net
pgpfmBawXovDf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
