Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!ccvaxa!preece
From: preece@ccvaxa.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Against the Tide of Common LISP
Message-ID: <31800001@ccvaxa>
Date: Tue, 10-Feb-87 11:12:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.31800001
Posted: Tue Feb 10 11:12:00 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Feb-87 18:52:36 EST
References: <2545@well.UUCP>
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:well.UUCP:2545:ccvaxa:31800001:000:1178
Nf-From: ccvaxa.UUCP!preece    Feb 10 10:12:00 1987


	jjacobs@well.UUCP:
>	"Against the Tide of Common LISP"
>	...
> MEMBER is a perfect example. I complained to David Betz (XLISP) that MEMBER
> used EQ instead of EQUAL.  I only checked about 4 books and manuals (UCILSP,
> INTERLISP, IQLISP and a couple of others).  David correctly pointed out that
> CL defaults to EQ unless you use the keyword syntax.  So years of training,
> learning and ingrained habit go out the window.  How many bugs
> will this introduce.  MEMQ wasn't good enough?
----------
This error of fact (MEMBER defaults to EQL in CL, not to EQ) is just
one of many things that got bashed on when this was posted before
(6-9 months ago).  It's often useful to have a diatribe posted to make
us think about our preconceptions and reconsider our biases, but one
would appreciate it if a NEW diatribe could be come up with rather
than one which has already been around the block...
[I could be wrong; it could be that it was posted to the CL mailing
list and that this list didn't see it; in either case the author
should have reviewed it in the light of the discussion.]

-- 
scott preece
gould/csd - urbana
uucp:	ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece
arpa:	preece@gswd-vms