Re: [DOC] About Lisp Data Types

[Emanuel Berg]

Arthur Miller wrote:

>> The parts that the OP has quoted are really poor, I agree
>> with him.
>
> Njah. This is time to get the Dragon book and read it cover
> to cover .... just kidding. Chapter 1. introduction would
> be enough.

It should offer precise definitions of every term it
introduces instead of speaking of what something is
"primarily" and "only secondarily" compared to "other
languages" while theorizing what distinctions one "needs to
emphasize" and what to keep "in the back of one's mind".

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal