| Well, maybe not EVERY point. It just often feels like you emphasize the parts of the write that I focus on least. >What were the 'ideas' that were dropped, even though somehow old code still runs? Well, fexprs and dynamic scope by default are the big ones, but also the idea of functions as lists, which are why it doesn't have lambda. >The point was, claiming a 'slower compilation process' due to splicing backquote usage, while in fact the whole compilation of the example you gave was the really slower one, because use used a slower macro system which traverses code for renaming and re-renaming. I appreciate the irony, but as I've now said several times, that wasn't my justification for using cons. I even said that they hypothetical speed increase would be negligible, and unlikely to be noticed, before you showed that the speed increase wasn't even there. This is one of the things it seems like you missed. >That's what I say: vague ideas don't matter much when forming language families. Code does. Books. Libraries. Communities. That's not entirely true. Sure, code matters a bit, but Java definitely comes from the C family, and the code doesn't transfer at all. As for communities, see for yourself: Scheme was born from the MACLisp community, and retains strong ties the modern equivalent: Common Lisp. |