[no subject]

[Robert W. Kerns <RWK at MIT-MC>]

I didn't say I objected to generic functions, I said there are problems with
them.

What's wrong with doing PLUS on characters is that you can't add two characters
meaningfully.  This disagrees with the semantics of PLUS in general, so I don't
think it should be grouped in.

There already *IS* a floating point version of '>', and always has been.
Look in the Moonual (if you can find one, sigh...).  I agree, generic functions
are good things to have.  Maybe LESSP should work on characters.  Do you think
it should allow you to compare characters and fixnums?  Characters and flonums?
Part of the disagreement stems from another issue -- the LISPM's use of the
Maclisp fixnum-only names for the generic operations.  Fixnum only operations
are necessary in non-LISPM environments.

What do you think '<' should do with the font information?  Ignore it?  If so,
NIL can't do it.  Even if the font info is included in the comparison, it would
take KMP's MacLisp hack for FRANZ and other non-immediate-fixnum lisps to do
it.  I'm not sure if it's possible for everyone in general to do it.  I still
think the recommended way should be via CHAR<.