> instead lisp is still the language that it was 50 years ago. I beg you to differ. The original, McCarthy Lisp was a succinct, powerful, flexible, dynamic lan

> instead lisp is still the language that it was 50 years ago. I beg you to differ. The original, McCarthy Lisp was a succinct, powerful, flexible, dynamic language based on a small set of axioms. Through times, a lot has been thrown out for sake of performance (which was understood to require compilation). Um, well, in case of Lisp, it means a lot of cruft has been added (some say, bolted onto) -- the simplicity etc.etc. was lost. Those days functions aren't even lists anymore, and scoping is lexical! With a few notable exceptions. Which are either hold-outs, or back-to-the-roots/back-to-what-worked-better efforts. Arc is closer to the original Lisp. Also, is more pleasing to use. Not a coincidence.