Comment by notpushkin

3 hours ago

Gotcha. Too bad – I was hoping there was at least some (non-trivial) subset you can run on both :(

Any idea why is it not a thing? Is this level of interop not practical for some reason?

1 comment

notpushkin

Lisp dialects have diverged quite a bit, and it would be a lot of work to bridge the differences to a degree approaching 100%. 90% is easy, but only works for small trivial programs.

I say this, having written a "95%" Common Lisp for Emacs (still a toy), and successfully ran an old Maclisp compiler and assembler in Common Lisp.

https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/emacs-cl

https://github.com/PDP-6/ITS-138/blob/master/tools/maclisp.l...