Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!uknet!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: Scheme vs Classical Lisp
Message-ID: <DFH4Es.3Cw@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK
References: <9509192130.aa04641@mc.lcs.mit.edu> <43opqs$h1q@ici-paris.ensta.fr>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:23:15 GMT
Lines: 17

Celestin Helleu <helleu> writes:

>Here are some differences between Scheme / Lisp

>- Binding (static for scheme, dynamic for some old lisp)

It's worth bearing in mind that most old Lisps had static
(lexical) binding in some cases.

For instance, in compiled MacLisp, local variables would be
statically bound unless declared "special".

That much is the same as Common Lisp.  What Common Lisp adds
is "lexical closures".  Common Lisp also has the same binding
semantics for both interpreted and compiled code.

-- jeff
