Subject: Re: HyperSpec
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 05:37:45 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>
Leslie P. Polzer <> wrote:
| It's gone. Intentional?

Yes, I suspect so. Look in the archives for May 2008 (or so) for
a long discussion about the version previously being served up by
"" (a.k.a. "") being "too old" and/or not giving
the proper vendor credit. E.g. this thread:

    Rob Warnock: 

    Edi Weitz:
      I would advise against pointing out the URL and
      instead show the one at

      The CLHS at is at version 4.0 while the one at is at 7.0, presumably fixing a couple of
      issues with earlier versions. It also makes clearer that
      (the predecessors of) LispWorks - and not the ALU - paid
      for the generation of the HyperSpec, own the rights to it,
      and made it publicly available.

    Kent M Pitman:
      The issues were not major (and none are technical), but yes,
      there are some fixes, including a better index.

      I know people prefer version 4 because it had the Java widget
      in the index that lets you type to it.  I removed that in later
      versions because in the early days was unreliable, and in modern
      times some people have it disabled for security reasons.
      The newer v7 has an enhanced master index, including indexing
      of the format operations and the sharpsign ops, if I recall.
      That alone makes it a very bad thing to be continuing to
      reference v4 because a lot of people have a lot of trouble
      finding these.
      ...[quite a bit more detail]...

    ...[and much more discussion]...

There was a suggestion to put all three versions up on the ALU site
(Harlequin v4, Lispworks v6 or v7, & Franz v6.2), but instead it seems
the old Harlequin v4 was simply removed on the ALU site entirely.
(Oh, well.)


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607