Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel-eecis!netnews.com!howland.erols.net!usc!news.isi.edu!gremlin!shomase!jbarnett
From: jbarnett@shomase.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Jeff Barnett)
Subject: Re: Which one, Lisp or Scheme?
Message-ID: <E4oxoJ.FB2@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com>
Sender: news@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com (Usenet News Manager)
Reply-To: jbarnett@charming.nrtc.northrop.com
Organization: Northrop Automation Sciences Laboratory
References: <slrn5e5geh.dl.yunho@csl.snu.ac.kr> <joswig-ya023180002001971119300001@news.lavielle.com> <32ecf05f.24891572@news.sime.com> <3063380703454677@naggum.no>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:38:42 GMT
Lines: 13
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.lisp:24892 comp.lang.scheme:18186

In article <3063380703454677@naggum.no>, Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> writes:
|> | In my eyes Common Lisp is quite hard to learn 
|> | (compared to standard lisp or scheme)
|> 
|> what is "standard lisp"?

In the current context, I guess it means an "uncommon Lisp".
So any lisp with a small distribution must be standard!

Jeff Barnett

PS It's been that kind of day.

