Re: Game Over: O'Reilly Does Lisp

On Feb 6, 9:59 am, "John Thingstad" <jpth...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
På Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:18:50 +0100, skrev Pascal Costanza <p...@xxxxxxxxx>:



John Thingstad wrote:

The danger is in what we don't know. Either ignore Arc, or find out
what you are talking about.
Your clueless attacks are starting to annoy me. I am not sure whether I
like it or hate it. But I am wiling to give it a month.

Why does Arc deserve a more thorough investigation than any other of the
recent Lisp dialects / extensions? (This is not a rhetoric question, but
is closely related to the central point of my criticism.)

Why not, say, lush [1], to pick an arbitrary (!) example...

Pascal

[1]http://lush.sourceforge.net/

That belongs in the ignore bin. We have never discussed lush. (To my
knowledge)

--------------
John Thingstad

Then why didn't you ignore it? Pascal Constanza brought up some good
points. You immediately attacked at a personal level without
addressing those points. Why are you choosing such a response?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Game Over: OReilly Does Lisp
    ... John Thingstad wrote: ... Your clueless attacks are starting to annoy me. ... I am not sure whether I like it or hate it. ... Why does Arc deserve a more thorough investigation than any other of the recent Lisp dialects / extensions? ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Game Over: OReilly Does Lisp
    ... Your clueless attacks are starting to annoy me. ... I am not sure whether I like it or hate it. ... Why not, say, lush, to pick an arbitrary example... ... That belongs in the ignore bin. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)