Comment by sroerick 7 hours ago I'm going pretty deep on Lisp on accident - can anybody give me more context on this? 5 comments sroerick Reply hermitShell 5 hours ago You might find this interesting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43636230 wild_egg 7 hours ago more context beyond the changelog? what would you like to know? DonHopkins 5 hours ago ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( WalterGR 3 hours ago That’s Scheme, not Common Lisp.I’d recommend using close parens for your code sample. Those are portable between the two. dapperdrake 5 hours ago #|))))
hermitShell 5 hours ago You might find this interesting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43636230
DonHopkins 5 hours ago ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( WalterGR 3 hours ago That’s Scheme, not Common Lisp.I’d recommend using close parens for your code sample. Those are portable between the two. dapperdrake 5 hours ago #|))))
WalterGR 3 hours ago That’s Scheme, not Common Lisp.I’d recommend using close parens for your code sample. Those are portable between the two.
You might find this interesting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43636230
more context beyond the changelog? what would you like to know?
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
That’s Scheme, not Common Lisp.
I’d recommend using close parens for your code sample. Those are portable between the two.
#|))))