When you have methods named `cons` `car` and `cdr` that appear to work in the same way as lisp's methods of the same name it's pretty clear that you're not pret

When you have methods named `cons` `car` and `cdr` that appear to work in the same way as lisp's methods of the same name it's pretty clear that you're not pretending or attempting to be "novel". While it _should_ say it's a lisp / scheme, given those it doesn't really _need_ to say that because it's pretty forehead slappingly obvious to anyone who knows what lisp or scheme are.