Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!deimos!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!uxg.cso.uiuc.edu!uicbert.eecs.uic.edu!wilson From: wilson@uicbert.eecs.uic.edu Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme Subject: Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs Message-ID: <82000004@uicbert.eecs.uic.edu> Date: 30 Nov 88 23:53:00 GMT References: <237@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP> Lines: 6 Nf-ID: #R:cs-spool.calgary.UUCP:237:uicbert.eecs.uic.edu:82000004:000:222 Nf-From: uicbert.eecs.uic.edu!wilson Nov 30 17:53:00 1988 On the other hand, in Stallman's paper on EMACS, he says that it exploits dynamic binding for flexibility. Is the Scheme version (Edwin) as elegant as the Lisp version? Does it fake dynamic or fluid binding explicitly?