Subject: Re: C# is not Dylan (was: Re: C# : The new language from M$) From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 2000/07/01 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.dylan Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Jason Trenouth <firstname.lastname@example.org> | Apart from the syntax, want do you think of the semantics and | the feature set? I thought I said that: I concluded that Dylan was a waste of time. What kept me interested in it for a while was the Lisp-like syntax. I didn't find the semantics and the "feature set" sufficiently attractive on their own, and knowing how fixed-grammer languages evolve (rampant keyworditis and logorrhea), didn't appear to be something worth investing in at the time. However, it has been six years, so I ordered a couple books on Dylan from Functional Objects to see if there are any good ideas I am more likely to pick up now. (Incidentally, I didn't see any non-Windows offerings, which means I'm not inclinced to investigate further, as I simply don't deal with criminals, such as Microsoft.) #:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.