peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (09/22/90)
In article <20301@well.sf.ca.us> jjacobs@well.sf.ca.us (Jeffrey Jacobs) writes: > Having watched the LISP Syntax thread for a while, I thought a little > history might be in order... > Way back in the old days, [...] LISP was an interpreted language. Extension languages, by and large, still *are* interpreted... > However, if compilation is the primary development strategy (which it > is with CL), then the LISP syntax is not particularly useful. [...] ... so the LISP syntax *remains* particularly useful in this domain. And, remember, that's where this discussion started... -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com