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.)