From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: LISP feature comparability to Smalltalk??
Date: 1999/05/31
Message-ID: <3137133347086637@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 484017720
References: <928040402.6626@www.remarq.com> <3137032296419883@naggum.no> <tim-3005990814490001@jump-tnt-0006.customer.jump.net> <9Xh43.4197$Np1.222705@news.uswest.net> <tim-3005991909180001@jump-tnt-0130.customer.jump.net> <fBk43.4683$Np1.239670@news.uswest.net> <928115696.10939@www.remarq.com>
mail-copies-to: never
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* atl <anonymous@web.remarq.com>
| so let me get this straight, the answer to my original question is that
| lamba expressions are the LISP feature that most closely resemble
| smalltalk blocks?

  among symbols, complex numbers, hash tables, closures, streams, classes,
  conditions, and a better syntax, just to take a few Lisp features, it
  _still_ looks like closures most closely resemble Smalltalk blocks.

  your question looks facetious.  why are you asking such a funny question
  and being so serious about it?  what are you _really_ wondering about?

#:Erik
-- 
@1999-07-22T00:37:33Z -- pi billion seconds since the turn of the century