From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: Which one, Lisp or Scheme?
Date: 1997/01/26
Message-ID: <3063228293534809@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 212226079
references: <slrn5e5geh.dl.yunho@csl.snu.ac.kr> <5c0th8$iqd@nntp.hut.fi> <3062798163303133@naggum.no> <1997Jan23.150438.27424@wavehh.hanse.de> <3063102967705823@naggum.no> <s08u3o7yqzh.fsf@crawdad.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <199701252339132913329@pppx76.berlin.snafu.de>
mail-copies-to: never
organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313; http://www.naggum.no
newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme


* Juergen Nickelsen
| cl.el does not turn Emacs Lisp into a CLtL1 Lisp. It does provide some
| of the convenience functions like caadr, backquote and comma (but as
| macros, not reader macros, like in "(` (3 4 (, (+ 5 6)) 7)))", and some
| other. 

I'm getting _real_ sick and tired of old prejudice against various Lisps.

next time, check your facts with a recent Emacs.  the backquote package was
completely rewritten 1994-03-06.  that's nearly three years ago!  the Lisp
reader now accepts both the old and the new style equally well.

*sigh*

#\Erik
-- 
1,3,7-trimethylxanthine -- a basic ingredient in quality software.