From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!ossa.telenet-ops.be!nmaster.kpnqwest.net!nreader2.kpnqwest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Your introduction to Lisp... References: <63637457.0204040727.798c0862@posting.google.com> Mail-Copies-To: never From: Erik Naggum Message-ID: <3227617474730404@naggum.net> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 18 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:24:35 GMT X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@KPNQwest.no X-Trace: nreader2.kpnqwest.net 1018628675 193.71.199.50 (Fri, 12 Apr 2002 18:24:35 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 18:24:35 MET DST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:31526 * gat@jpl.nasa.gov (Erann Gat) | FWIW, my reason for writing Scheme in CL (if indeed that is what I'm | doing) is that IMO it is much easier to write Scheme in CL than it is in | Scheme. If true, this explains why Scheme freaks so seldom learn Common Lisp well. Common Lisp would just be a "better Scheme" to them, and just like C programmers keep programming in C forever because all the "modern" languages all have a basic C-like syntax. Perhaps a significant change in the syntax is _necessary_ to make people change their habits, as they would no longer be visually tempted to think it is the same as they know. /// -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief. Post with compassion: http://home.chello.no/~xyzzy/kitten.jpg