Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!aiai!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: LeLisp info request: Le-Lisp is alive and well
Message-ID: <2576@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 25 May 90 18:23:29 GMT
References: <1990May2.021557.24873@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <18084@well.sf.ca.us> <8082@ilog.UUCP> <18139@well.sf.ca.us> <136167@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton)
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 25

In article <136167@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> vladimir@prosper (Vladimir G. Ivanovic) writes:
>In article <18139@well.sf.ca.us>, jjacobs@well (Jeffrey Jacobs) writes:
>>I'm *very* glad to hear that Le_Lisp is indeed still alive and well in
>>Europe.  Its too bad that it didn't catch on better in the U.S.

>Would you care to elaborate?  What features are sufficiently better than, say,
>Scheme or Common Lisp to justify having YAVL (Yet Another Version of Lisp),
>another standard, another learning curve?

Well, Jeff Jacobs is well-known as a critic of Common Lisp, so I'm
sure he'll be able to provide some reasons.  

As for Scheme, it still lacks such things as macros, modules,
condition handling, and even the ability to define new (disjoint)
types; many people would like to use Lisps that have such features
rather than wait for Scheme to do it right.

This is not to say Scheme is bad.  I'm glad Scheme is being developed
in the way it is.  However, I also think it's a good idea to have some
variety in the Lisp world so that we don't get stuck in too few ways
of doing things.

Jeff Dalton,                      JANET: J.Dalton@uk.ac.ed             
AI Applications Institute,        ARPA:  J.Dalton%uk.ac.ed@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Edinburgh University.             UUCP:  ...!ukc!ed.ac.uk!J.Dalton