Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!newstand.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.mathworks.com!howland.erols.net!ix.netcom.com!vrotney
From: vrotney@netcom.com (William Paul Vrotney)
Subject: Re: Why lisp failed in the marketplace
In-Reply-To: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk's message of Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:13:57 -0000
Message-ID: <vrotneyE5y8Iy.5KJ@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom On-Line Services
References: <5edfn1$83b@Masala.CC.UH.EDU> <m3pvxxylnf.fsf@laphroig.mch.sni.de> <5efl85$33h@fido.asd.sgi.com> <MPG.d762519de881c919896dc@news.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 10:44:58 GMT
Lines: 26
Sender: vrotney@netcom7.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.lisp:25616 comp.lang.scheme:18807


In article <MPG.d762519de881c919896dc@news.demon.co.uk>
cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Cyber Surfer) writes:
> 
> Special cases like this get used all the time, both for C++ _and_ 
> Lisp. Just count the number of AI apps that get used to support the 
> pro-Lisp argument. To many people, this kind of argument will make C++ 
> look good (to the C++ people), not Lisp!
> 
> It's one of those classic communication problems. Like the Douglas 
> Adams joke about humans and dolphins, each sees themselves as superior 
> for exactly the same reasons. Perhaps we need to change the language 
> used in pro-Lisp arguments? We could start by _never_ refering to AI.
>  

Great idea!  But why stop there?  Let's stop referring to the term "Lisp" in
this news group.  In fact let's change then name of this newsgroup to

        comp.lang.euphemism

Sorry, absolutely could not resist.  :-)


-- 

William P. Vrotney - vrotney@netcom.com
