Re: demonic problem descriptions
From: Rahul Jain (rjain_at_nyct.net)
Date: 02/10/05
- Next message: Kent M Pitman: "Re: Continuations in Common Lisp (with apologies)"
- Previous message: William D Clinger: "Re: demonic numbers !"
- In reply to: Cameron MacKinnon: "Re: demonic problem descriptions"
- Next in thread: Barry Margolin: "Re: demonic problem descriptions"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 12:23:07 -0500
Cameron MacKinnon <cmackin+nn@clearspot.net> writes:
> True... That's what c.l.l is for! The original poster got helpful code
> and suggestions, but also, disturbingly, comments to the effect that
> yes, Lisp is a programmable programming language, but you shouldn't
> program it THAT way.
No, he is claiming that CL is wrongly specified. We are claiming that it
is specified in a way that makes sense for the majority of its users.
-- Rahul Jain rjain@nyct.net Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
- Next message: Kent M Pitman: "Re: Continuations in Common Lisp (with apologies)"
- Previous message: William D Clinger: "Re: demonic numbers !"
- In reply to: Cameron MacKinnon: "Re: demonic problem descriptions"
- Next in thread: Barry Margolin: "Re: demonic problem descriptions"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|