PEJH> The basic arguments I can see for replacing the lisp engine PEJH> would be easing of support problems (separate from PEJH> packaging/object systems, although that would obviously help PEJH> things out a LOT), adding of features that are truly needed PEJH> (threading, lexical scoping and packages to name three) to PEJH> support improvements in current usage, and speedups. Okay, I buy that (essentially that's why I'm watching Erik's CL-Emacs). But I don't think it's a reason to start a Scheme-CL language discussion. Why not have an engine that supports both (besides Elisp), which abstracts away from specific language details ? (One reason is, of course, that we'll probably have to write such a beast on our own - any PhD candidates volunteering for it ?) Holger -- --- http://www.coling.uni-freiburg.de/~schauer --- Why people hate using Lisp: "Are people suffering from parenthophobia-by-proxy, mistaking `parens' for `parents'?" - Erik Naggum in comp.emacs.xemacs