sadly, no. Excerpt from the issue

> In #401 @cnblogs-dudu referenced a post explaining that the GC was machine-generated from LISP. Since gc.cpp is not a real source code (just intermediate code), but the lisp code is, should it be more useful to publish the lisp source and the transpiler (Source-to-source compiler) for LISP -> CPP?

It's my understanding that the LISP -> CPP was only done in the beginning and is no longer carried out. I.e. all recent development is done directly in the .cpp source.

There's a reply from a Microsoft employee that seems to confirm this, see https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/issues/408#issuecomment-78...

Here's a comment by Patrick Dussud on an old blog entry explaining the LISP origins of the GC:

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/patrick_dussud/2006/11/21/h...

I thought I knew a thing or two about .NET, having used it since beta days, I had no idea LISP was used to bootstrap the original GC code. Fascinating stuff.

I've archived it here just in case:

http://archive.is/1qk25

Patrick is also interviewed on Channel9 and he talks about the GC. Not watched it yet:

https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Patrick-Dussud-Ga...

Yeah that's a great video, he really knows his stuff!