Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!udel!princeton!siemens!steve
From: steve@siemens.UUCP (Steve Clark)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: lisp environments summary
Message-ID: <329@siemens.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 8-Dec-87 08:54:39 EST
Article-I.D.: siemens.329
Posted: Tue Dec  8 08:54:39 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 13-Dec-87 11:33:03 EST
References: <613@umbc3.UMD.EDU> <325@siemens.UUCP> <323@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM>
Reply-To: steve@siemens.UUCP (Steve Clark)
Organization: Siemens RTL, Princeton, NJ
Lines: 22
Keywords: Interlisp, Editing, Files

In article <323@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM> malcolm@spar.UUCP (Malcolm Slaney) writes:
>In article <325@siemens.UUCP> steve@siemens.UUCP (Steve Clark) writes:
>>  The correct way to deal with files and storing your lisp code is
>>  essentially the way Interlisp does it.  You edit your functions
>>  in Lisp, and when you want to save them you write them out to files.
>
>Perhaps this works well for pure Xerox users but I spent last week porting
>some software that already runs on Symbolics and Suns to a Xerox machine
>and found it didn't work.
[...]
>								Malcolm

Good point.  I maintain that the non-Interlisp systems are wrong, however.  It
is clearly more advanced to treat a file as a database of definitions of
functions, data, structures, etc. than to treat it as a string of characters
that might have been typed at the keyboard.  However, since the rest of the
world hasn't caught up yet, there are bound to be incompatibilities.

Note:  I don't claim the Interlisp system is perfect; far from it!  Also,
there IS a text editor in Interlisp-D: TEDIT.

   -Steve