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?