Immutable things.

Christopher J. Vogt
Tue, 13 May 1997 09:40:04 -0500

At 8:34 PM -0500 5/12/97, Dwight Hughes wrote:
>| From: Chris Bitmead uid(x22068) <>
>| [ -- snip -- ]
>| The question is, do we really want to re-invent Lisp? Doesn't this
>| project have enough on it's plate without introducing this question?
>We could have considerably more on our plate if our tools are not
>appropriate. Rather like trying to plant roses with a bulldozer.

My view is this:
We have a model that many people feel still exceeds what is available
today, and that is the LispM.  Duplicate that model as a baseline, and then
make additions/modifications.

So when I see a proposal, I ask myself "What problem with the LispM is this
going to solve?"  And for all the flaws in CL, I don't see how inventing a
new language (or dialect if you prefer) is going to solve more problems
than it might potentially create.  Never mind trying to get 100 people to
agree on each and every feature left in or left out!

Christopher (Chris) J. Vogt
Omaha, NE