Re: GNU Extension Language Plans

[loeffled@swim2.sematech.org (David Loeffler)]

How about 'Gleem' - rhymes and has a "G" and is shines ;-)

In article <LEWIKK.94Oct24130606@grasshopper.aud.alcatel.com> lewikk@grasshopper.aud.alcatel.com (Kevin K. Lewis) writes:

   Path: pulitzer.eng.sematech.org!gater3.sematech.org!news.dell.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!nott!bcarh189.bnr.ca!corpgate!news.utdallas.edu!fozzy.aud.alcatel.com!fozzy.aud.alcatel.com!lewikk
   From: lewikk@grasshopper.aud.alcatel.com (Kevin K. Lewis)
   Newsgroups: comp.org.lisp-users,comp.lang.scheme
   Date: 24 Oct 1994 18:06:06 GMT
   Organization: Alcatel Network Systems
   Lines: 11
   References: <9410201942.AA08436@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <389e9e$2q5@tools.near.net>
	   <38av7u$o5m@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>
   NNTP-Posting-Host: grasshopper.aud.alcatel.com
   Xref: pulitzer.eng.sematech.org comp.org.lisp-users:113 comp.lang.scheme:3483

   In article <38av7u$o5m@news.cs.tu-berlin.de> net@cs.tu-berlin.de (Oliver Laumann) writes:

      But Scheme is not a scripting language; it is a full, general-purpose
      programming language.  If the GNU extension language will be Scheme,
      then why not call it Scheme?  Given that we already have Emacs-Lisp,
      something like GNU-Scheme would be a logical choice.

   But that's neither catchy, nor funny, and, therefore, impractical. ;-)
   --
   Kevin K. Lewis               | My opinions may be unreasonable
   lewikk@aud.alcatel.com       | but such is the voice of inspiration