Last addendum, @jackdaniel has this map of the relationship between several lisps:
https://turtleware.eu/static/paste/5cc5464e-all-hierarchy.png

@snowdusk@mastodon.sdf.org @snowdusk@toobnix.org @mdhughes @kentpitman @ramin_hal9001 @northernlights @hairylarry @jns @nosrednayduj @jasmaz

Last addendum, @jackdaniel has this map of the relationship between several lisps:
https://turtleware.eu/static/paste/5cc5464e-all-hierarchy.png

@snowdusk@mastodon.sdf.org @snowdusk@toobnix.org @mdhughes @kentpitman @ramin_hal9001 @northernlights @hairylarry @jns @nosrednayduj @jasmaz

@screwlisp @ramin_hal9001 @northernlights @hairylarry @jns @nosrednayduj @jasmaz

And I made an allusion to something that it might have been hard to follow about conditionalizing for the list machine. there was a subtle difference that a package prefix could be factored over an expression, possibly separated by space, and with no regard to import or export:

foo: bar <==> foo::bar
foo:(a b c 17) <==> (foo::a foo::b foo::c 17)

But this meant that in portability, you could do weird things like

(#+lispm tv: draw-line ...)

to get a call to tv:draw-line on the lisp machine and just draw-line elsewhere.

or

#+lispm foo: (a b c 17)

to get (foo::a foo::b foo::c 17) on lisp machine and (a b c 17) elsewhere.

because even though common lisp doesn't allow a package prefix to be separated from the symbol, it is willing within a conditional to just treat that as a token to be ignored because the rules of parsing while in a failing conditional assume that you might be mentioning packages that don't exist in the current implementation or even tokens syntaxes that you can't parse.

(Note cl says cl-user::17 is a symbol but zetalisp on the lisp machine said it was a number because colon in zetalisp just bound the package and called read. For some reason, we decided not to do that in common lisp. Not sure if that was good or bad, but exemplifies the way in which #+ and #- was carefully designed to be compatible not just with common lisp but with other lisps, more by planned accident than any formal agreement. If that makes any sense.)

Compilation in maclisp according to the pitmanual:
https://maclisp.info/pitmanual/complr.html#23.1.1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maclisp
@mdhughes @kentpitman @ramin_hal9001 @northernlights @hairylarry @jns @nosrednayduj @jasmaz