On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:41 PM, Faré <fah...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is the point to evolve the Common Lisp standard into some kind of CLtL4,
Huh? Did I miss a CLtL3...? On topic: the proposed syntactic addition is nice, but imho too trivial and too easily provided as a library to bother with a CDR (that would need to be included in each implementation). Alessio -- Some gratuitous spam: http://ripple-project.org Ripple, social credit system http://villages.cc Villages.cc, Ripple-powered community economy http://common-lisp.net/project/armedbear ABCL, Common Lisp on the JVM http://code.google.com/p/tapulli my current open source projects http://www.manydesigns.com/ ManyDesigns Portofino, open source model-driven Java web application framework _______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
