Subject: Re: String to real From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 2000/06/08 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Tim Bradshaw <firstname.lastname@example.org> | Sure, that's the right answer. I just interpreted his `in ANSI CL' | to mean `standardly provided by the language'. I'm working with the notion that whatever is in the standard today is there because it existed outside the standard at some time and was deemed admissible into it, and I don't consider the concrete that standards are cast in to be completely solidified. The only way we can make something _become_ standard is to do the work and present it to the people who will hopefully measure the technical merits and accept it. Let's get agreement on useful, good stuff. (And let's all agree or encourage others to implement it that way.) I interpreted his "in ANSI CL" to be the name of the language, but maybe that's because I think programming _solely_ in ANSI CL is a counter-productive limitation of your universe, just as writing _solely_ in ISO C is fairly stupid. It's like refusing to use any software that doesn't come with your operating system or even with the hardware. | But the reuse mafia tend to laugh at me... Well, laugh back: I hate "reuse" almost as much as I hate "API". I love language design, however. #:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.