Re: Common Lisp book still apropos?


On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:12:43 +0200, Edi Weitz <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
| ...
| throw CLtL1 away

Not literally, of course---just don't use it as a reference for ANSI
Common Lisp (i.e., Common Lisp as it was eventually standardized).
It is a good book.

---Vassil.


--
The truly good code is the obviously correct code.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What next after Practical ??
    ... > I've been going back and forth between Practical Common Lisp and ANSI ... > Common Lisp (with Common Lisp the Language, 2nd ed as a reference). ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Is there a test suite for C ?
    ... language correctly and produces correct code? ... There is such a suite (not associated with any specific ... implementation) for Common Lisp which is a bigger language ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: ECL 0.9j-p1
    ... Sure you can sell even GPL software. ... for not quite being ANSI compatible. ... then 'near 100% compatibility' of the Common Lisp implementation ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Bootstrapping ANSI CL
    ... and the goal is a running ANSI ... Common Lisp, what would be the implementation path to take that would ... bytecode interpreter in assembler, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: finding the position of an element in a "list of strings"
    ... As a newbie, you can learn more reading a tutorial or a ... book about Common Lisp than the Reference. ... NEW GRAND UNIFIED THEORY DISCLAIMER: ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)