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