<dvandeun@vub.ac.be> wrote:
+---------------
| Brian Harvey (bh@anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU) wrote:
| : whether the feature would make Scheme more Schemely, or more
| : universal-language-y.  If the latter, put it in CL instead.
| 
| I agree with the whole paragraph, except for the last sentence.  I 
| believe that there is a place for a language with the elegance of
| Scheme and many of the features of Common Lisp.
| 
| Just don't describe this language as the next Scheme version, thus
| implying that Scheme as we know it is obsolete.  It's "Scheme++".
+---------------

Actually, I've always thought of that language as "Common Scheme", myself. ;-}


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock, 7L-551		rpw3@sgi.com   http://reality.sgi.com/rpw3/
Silicon Graphics, Inc.		Phone: 650-933-1673
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.		FAX: 650-933-4392
Mountain View, CA  94043	PP-ASEL-IA