Re: Learning Lisp in Linux?

OMouse wrote:
On Oct 28, 5:51 am, Ken Tilton <kennytil...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Klaus Schilling wrote:

Ken Tilton <kennytil...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Wow, I am really out on a limb there. It would be pretty easy to take
me down by naming a superior or even near equal environment.

The GNU Emacs is vastly superior to any enviornment,
as denied by fools only.

Klaus Schilling

We have to start a new survey for Schemers trying to sneak into the
Common Lisp fold from the Scheme failed experiment ... ah, there ya go:

Sorry but I can't hear you, I'm reading through the Scheme language
specification for the 123901287387th time in a row! LA LA LA, it's
only 50 pages (R5RS that is, R6RS is the red-headed step child at the

Hey, you almost got the reference, too!

Of course now you have to reply that it's 50 pages because Schemers
have ADD or AD/HD, or are academics that generalize everything and
never get real work done.

Patiently waiting for an intriguing and hilarious response,
Rudolfo lah

Actually, I am way too saddened (but not surprised) by the density of this latest wave of trolls, too dull to recognize a screamingly obvious reference to the sneering remark somewhere Schemily prominent about the Scheme spec being shorter than the CL spec's index. Lispers (we own the name now) have long wanted greater mindshare, and I have long warned them of the human dregs that would follow. You are commended for proving The Kenny right again, tho my infallibility must be getting tedious in its own right, and for occasioning a reprise of the best line of 2007 and possibly the century, in reply to R6's bloating up to hundreds of pages -- anyone got the reference? Not me:

"It's going to be tough coming up with an index that big."




"Career highlights? I had two. I got an intentional walk
from Sandy Koufax and I got out of a rundown against the Mets."."
- Bob Uecker