Joseph.Ginder%CMU-CS-SPICE@sri-unix.UUCP (10/18/83)
ired to do IO.) For a good statement of the goals of the Common Lisp effort, see Guy Steele's paper in the 1982 Lisp and Functional Programming Conference Proceedings. Let me hasten to add that I agree with Pereira's concern that expediency not be promoted to principle. It is for this very reason that language features such as flavors and the loop construct were not included in the Common Lisp specification -- we determined not to standardize until concensus could be reached that a feature was both widely accepted and believed to be a fairly good solution to a common problem. The goal is not to stifle experimentation, but to promote good solutions that have been found through previous experience. In no sense do I believe anyone regards the current Common Lisp language as the Final Word on Lisp. Also, I have never interpreted Moses' diamond vs. mud analogy to have anything to do with authoritarianism, only aesthetics. Do others ? -- Joe Ginder