I think I can explain the author's point of view. C# 2.0 was still the cutting edge for most of 2007. Most shops were still using 1.1. The author's qualm, comi

I think I can explain the author's point of view. C# 2.0 was still the cutting edge for most of 2007. Most shops were still using 1.1. The author's qualm, coming from a Lisp POV, is most likely that if you are a consumer of C# 1.1 you can't just build C# 2.0 or 3.0 or 4.0 features. Using Lisp, he had access to everything that would eventually become C# features and then some, because if you want a fancy new language feature in Lisp you just add it. You don't have to touch the compiler (you write functions, macros, or a micro-compiler at the limit). So there's some hyperbole there, but it's true that C# 2.0 or 1.1 was really not anything special and felt a lot like "Microsoft's Java" at the time.