Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis <ilias / lazaridis.com> writes:
>>>>The essence of the whole thread (and the SCHEME evaluations) was this one:
>>>>
>>>>"
>>>>estimation: disrespect.
>>>>
>>>>scheme => shame !
>>>>
>>>>provisional rejected.
>>>>"
>>>
>>>This is so ridiculous, I don't even know what to say.
>>
>>Please explain.
>>
>>This here is still valid:
>>
>>"
>>maybe a scheme lover can serve me with some *concrete* facts that can
>>change my mind!
>>"
> 
> If you dismiss a language due the lack of referencing an influent
> person 

John McCarthy: inventor/discoverer of LISP (and thus the "Grand Father" 
of all LISP dialects).

> in the standard, you'll never get anywere.

I understand your thought, which is false.

I sense that I'm close to my goal.

-

As for Scheme:

-

Respect to the Roots.

-

Neither the LISP-to-SCHEME-transformers (Guy Lewis Steele Jr. and Gerald
Jay Sussman) nor the SCHEME community have this.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.scheme/msg/01aeb2489438816f

SCHEME [the language & the surrounding systems] cannot procude the next 
generation software systems.

..

-- 
http://lazaridis.com