[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs

To: scheme@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs
From: uxg.cso.uiuc.edu!uicbert.eecs.uic.edu!wilson@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu
Date: Wed ,30 Nov 88 19:53:00 EDT
References: <237@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP>
Sender: scheme-request@mc.lcs.mit.edu

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?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs
  - From: agate!saturn!kjell@labrea.stanford.edu (Kjell Post)

References:
- Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs
  - From: att!alberta!calgary!cpsc!jameson@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Kevin Jameson)

Prev by Date: Rationals in MIT C Scheme
Next by Date: Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs
Previous by thread: Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs
Next by thread: Re: Lisp vs. Scheme Emacs
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread