3 ms·

The Lisp of the past two or three decades is fully multi-paradigmatic. It supports a functional style... Then, by your definition, it's not dishonest t

by gcr 13y ago

The Lisp of the past two or three decades is fully multi-paradigmatic. It supports a functional style... Then, by your definition, it's not dishonest to say that "Racket retains the functional goodness of Lisp." I don't understand. What's the problem?

tsm 13y ago
It's not incorrect, just misleading. If I made a Python descendant named Monty and said, "Monty retains the functional goodness of Python", wouldn't you give me flack since that's not the main point of Python? What if I said C++ retained the imperative goodness of C?