Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:36:18 +0200
Kent M Pitman <pitman@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> First, SBCL is itself harming the industry by catering to the notion
> that you don't have to pay to acquire something.
If Lisp had only non-free implementations, it would be now even more
dead than it is.
(Please don't extrapolate this to ancient times. I mean *now*,
when there are alternatives.)
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
\__/ qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx
^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- From: Kent M Pitman
- Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- References:
- Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- From: William Bland
- Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- From: Kaz Kylheku
- Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- From: Peter Schuller
- Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- From: Kent M Pitman
- Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- Prev by Date: Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- Next by Date: Re: Why is Lisp not as popular as Python?
- Previous by thread: Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- Next by thread: Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
