PCL-CLOS compatibility

[keulen%coeur.uucp@relay.eu.net (Hans van Keulen)]

Hi,

We are considering to use PCL for building a prototype for one
of the DELTA projects of the European Community. We will be using
Xerox-1186 machines with Xerox-Medley and a Sun 3/60 with 
Sun Common Lisp. 

However, we are afraid of two things:
	1) PCL may deviate from the CLOS standard (X3J13) unnoticedly:

	> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 90 20:41 PST
	> From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM
	> Subject: Re: Benchmarking CLOS

        .....

	>   2) PCL is not CLOS.  PCL is a portable implementation with some
	>      interesting architectural ideas, I believe it can be made to
	>      perform relatively well, but most of the current ports do not
	>      perform adequately.

	>   3) Not all ports of PCL are created equal.  The P in PCL means
	>      that PCL can be ported relatively easily, not that it is written
	>      in pure Common Lisp.

	2) PCL may contain unexpected bugs.
Two things which may result in quite time-consumable activities (and 
headache evoking).

We would like to hear about experiences of others in using PCL and
opinions on whether it is a good idea to use it (there is of course
a trade-off in using plain Common Lisp and a non-optimum PCL).
We would also like to know how or where, if available, we can get 
an overview of the differences between PCL and CLOS.


Hans van Keulen