RP> I think that tail recursion could be done in common lisp. How? RP> It seems to me to be contrary to scheme to have,for example, doc RP> strings in functions like they are in emacs lisp and common lisp, Indeed you would store them in a different way. That does not mean you could not implement a defun emulation in about three lines of Scheme. What's the problem? RP> 3. Contrary to what Michael says, I think that it will be less emulation RP> going on from emacs lisp to common lisp than from emacs lisp to scheme. RP> We can always ask Kent Pitman what he thinks. :-) Naively, one could RP> imagine havine an emacs-lisp-user package like the standard defined RP> common-lisp-user package except that in this package, all variables are RP> special and the let acts something like fluid-let which is defined in RP> some schemes. In addition to an emacs-lisp mode, you could also have an RP> emacs-common-lisp mode. Both modes are package aware and when you send RP> regions or definitions to XEmacs, the code gets evaluated in the correct RP> semantic environment. That sounds nice in theory, but someone needs to actually look into the technical issues and *do it*. RP> If you create a defun macro, why use scheme? Oh, come on, Reggie! Pl-lease! RP> Having a standard just reduces the number of non-standard fundamental RP> language extensions you need like a low level macro system, RP> records/structures, objects, and conditions. You would like the RP> semantics of these things to have been worked out through blood, sweat, RP> and usage and not have to worry about having to change the semantics RP> because now they are not powerful enough. I couldn't agree more. My perspective on this is that *not enough* blood and sweat has gone into Common Lisp. (Actually, CL hasn't bled enough ...) The abstractions in CL are usually half-assed and not as general and powerful as they could be. (Otherwise, CL and Scheme would be identical.) I guess I'll have to finally finish that write-up on the module system. -- Cheers =8-} Chipsy Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla