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: <2591@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 27 May 90 17:53:44 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> <2576@skye.ed.ac.uk> <136285@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton)
Followup-To: comp.lang.lisp
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 19

In article <136285@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> vladimir@prosper (Vladimir G. Ivanovic) writes:
>My question is still unanswered.  I'm NOT arguing the merits or flaws of
>Scheme or Common Lisp. It appears you are, but I'm not.

All I did was provide a list of features that are not yet in (standard
or R*RS) Scheme.  

>Are there some features of Le-Lisp that are not present in Scheme or Common
>Lisp that are "good" to have? 

See my previous message.  Common Lisp does have such things, but some
people prefer the form they take in Le_Lisp.

Since this newsgroup is forwarded to the Scheme mailing list, and
since some people on that list don't like to receive discussions of
this sort, I think we should persue this via mail or in comp.lang.
lisp (where I have directed followups).

-- Jeff