[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?
My understanding is that there have been a number of efforts over the years
to put a more "conventional" syntax on top of scheme or lisp. Of course,
they don't get far because after a while, people prefer the s-expression
syntax (which is more powerful once you factor in macros etc.). However,
this approach might be worth trying again. Perhaps this would be one way
to give scheme the LFE-nature. Does DrScheme have anything like this?
Parenthetically (pun intended), the guile scheme people did this a few
years ago but abandoned the effort.
> From: Shriram Krishnamurthi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 21:13:41 -0400
> Paul Prescod wrote:
> > LFE == CP4E
> It's a nice bit of propaganda. The TeachScheme! folks (and no doubt
> others) had been doing this for some years when CP4E came out, which
> the document accepts only grudgingly. (As I recall, the original
> version of the document didn't even go that far.)