8 ms·
> You might do more than just disagree. He didnt do more than just claim it. > You might supply some reasons why you think Scheme isn't a Lisp. So you want a
by muuh-gnu 11y ago
> You might do more than just disagree.
He didnt do more than just claim it.
> You might supply some reasons why you think Scheme isn't a Lisp.
So you want a negative proof without providing a positive proof first?
> That would make a much more informative post.
So why didnt you remind the previous poster of this, instead of reminding me?
- AnimalMuppet 11y agoTrue. He didn't do more than just claim it. I replied to you because, while an unsupported claim is regrettable, an unsupported denial takes you all the way into "Is too! Is not!" 5-year-old-style argument. iak8god started down that road; your reply went further down it. It also seemed to me that your attitude was sharper than iak8god's. Your reply to me did not change that opinion. > So you want a negative proof without providing a positive proof first? Yes. I want you to try to be better than the person you're replying to, rather than trying to be at least as bad.
- iak8god 11y agoI suppose I should have said "Scheme is, and always has been, widely considered a Lisp." Do you need more "proof" of this than Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheme_%28programming_language%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheme_%28programming_language... ?