4 ms·
Well, okay, it's not literally called Lisp; it has the "Common" in front. On the surface, it seems to be sticking to the letter of the wish. Does it conform to
by kbutler 10y ago
Well, okay, it's not literally called Lisp; it has the "Common" in front. On the surface, it seems to be sticking to the letter of the wish. Does it conform to the spirit, though? Is a common English adjective enough? Is "Common" a sufficient qualifier?
Yes. Yes it is.
("new" is more common than "common", but not incredibly so: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=common%2Cnew&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Ccommon%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cnew%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=common%2Cnew&y...)
- jasonkostempski 10y agoWhen the next Lisp comes out, this one won't be "new" anymore so it'll be just "Lisp".
- kazinator 10y agoI've never seen a rewrite or next generation of any program or function called "common". But new is common: ntalkd -- new talkd; nvi -- new vi; nftw -- new version of the ftw POSIX function (file tree walk); ncurses -- new curses; ncal -- new cal program; nawk -- new awk, ... Basically Lutz calling his project NewLisp is a form of trolling.
- bitwize 10y agoCommon Lisp was supposed to provide a "common" successor to the various Lisp platforms developed especially at MIT's project MAC, SAIL, and the Lisp machine vendors spun off from these.