From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: Best Lisp for Windows NT?
Date: 1999/05/05
Message-ID: <3134918456146648@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 474417458
References: <372c9359.702572255@news.earthlink.net> <m3r9ozl184.fsf@eho.eaglets.com> <372de455.723304977@news.earthlink.net> <3134715279176341@naggum.no> <372e9030.832835754@news.earthlink.net> <3134816211797975@naggum.no> <372FB204.325B1E9B@mindless.com> <3134865083642662@naggum.no> <372fff1b.926766920@news.earthlink.net> <3134899638508182@naggum.no> <373155f4.948999168@news.earthlink.net> <3134911590693621@naggum.no> <37327c84.958871934@news.earthlink.net>
mail-copies-to: never
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* please-reply-in-the-forum@thank.you
| The reason why it matters to me is because I often send executables as
| email attachments.

  then you're in luck.  instead of sending the entire executable, you can
  get away with sending the code to be loaded into the Lisp world.  you can
  also ship patches instead of entire new versions.

  just because you have found a solution doesn't mean every problem fits it.

#:Erik