Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!ucbvax!husc6!bloom-beacon!AI.AI.MIT.EDU!Alan From: Alan@AI.AI.MIT.EDU (Alan Bawden) Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme Subject: Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs Message-ID: <19881203222902.2.ALAN@QUESTION-AUTHORITY.AI.MIT.EDU> Date: 3 Dec 88 22:29:00 GMT References: <5621@saturn.ucsc.edu> <1020@hub.ucsb.edu> Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 15 Date: 2 Dec 88 06:42:46 GMT From: agate!saturn!kjell@labrea.stanford.edu (Kjell Post) How can a *bug* be considered flexible? The original Scheme papers by Sussman and Steele contain some good arguments for why dynamic variables are sometimes exactly what you want. Date: 3 Dec 88 01:05:58 GMT From: ucsbcsl!vision!nosmo@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Vincent Brooke Kraemer) Forgive my stupidity on this answer - but wasn't EMACS originally written in Lisp, like way way back. (i.e. before we were scheme'ing) No, the original EMACS was written in TECO. (And in case you are wondering, TECO is dynamically scoped.)