www/gnu rms-lisp.html

[Richard M. Stallman]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       13/01/14 18:50:35

Modified files:
        gnu            : rms-lisp.html 

Log message:
        Clarify footnote 6.  Add footnote 8.  Two punctuation and spacing
        fixes.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/gnu/rms-lisp.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.31&r2=1.32

Patches:
Index: rms-lisp.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/gnu/rms-lisp.html,v
retrieving revision 1.31
retrieving revision 1.32
diff -u -b -r1.31 -r1.32
--- rms-lisp.html       13 Oct 2012 03:10:58 -0000      1.31
+++ rms-lisp.html       14 Jan 2013 18:50:34 -0000      1.32
@@ -331,7 +331,7 @@
 the <abbr>MIT</abbr> AI Lab, and the hackers were not all
 at <abbr>MIT</abbr>. The war that Symbolics started was what wiped
 out <abbr>MIT</abbr>, but there were other events going on then. There
-were people giving up on cooperation and together, this wiped out the
+were people giving up on cooperation, and together this wiped out the
 community and there wasn't much left.</p>
 
 <p>Once I stopped punishing Symbolics, I had to figure out what to do
@@ -374,12 +374,13 @@
 of Emacs Lisp, from the beginning.</p>
 
 <p>Obviously, machines are bigger now, and we don't do it that way
-anymore. We put in &lsquo;caar&rsquo; and &lsquo;cadr&rsquo; and so
+any more. We put in &lsquo;caar&rsquo; and &lsquo;cadr&rsquo; and so
 on, and we might put in another looping construct one of these
 days. We're willing to extend it some now, but we don't want to extend
 it to the level of common Lisp. I implemented Common Lisp once on the
 Lisp machine, and I'm not all that happy with it. One thing I don't
-like terribly much is keyword arguments. They don't seem quite Lispy
+like terribly much is keyword arguments <a href="#foot-8">(8)</a>.
+They don't seem quite Lispy
 to me; I'll do it sometimes but I minimize the times when I do
 that.</p>
 
@@ -508,18 +509,23 @@
 aggression against the AI Lab.</li>
 
 <li id="foot-6">This statement has been misconstrued as saying that I
-never, ever looked at Symbolics' code.  Actually it says I did.
-
-<p>The Symbolics source code was available at MIT, where I was
+never, ever looked at Symbolics' code.  Actually it says I did look,
+at first.  The Symbolics source code was available at MIT, where I was
 entitled to read it, and at first that's how I found out about their
-changes.  But that meant I had to make extra effort to solve each
-problem differently, in order to avoid copying Symbolics code.  After
-a while, I concluded it was better not to even look.  That way I could
-write code in whatever way was best, without concern for what was in
+changes.
+
+<p>But that meant I had to make a special effort to solve each problem
+differently, in order to avoid copying Symbolics code.  After a while,
+I concluded it was better not to even look.  That way I could write
+code in whatever way was best, without concern for what might be in
 Symbolics' code.</p></li>
 
 <li id="foot-7">Symbolics at one point protested to MIT that my work,
 by thwarting their plan, had cost Symbolics a million dollars.</li>
+
+<li id="foot-8">I don't mind if a very complex and heavyweight
+function takes keyword arguments.  What bothers me is making simple
+basic functions such as &ldquo;member&rdquo; use them.</li>
 </ol>
 
 </div>
@@ -556,7 +562,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2012/10/13 03:10:58 $
+$Date: 2013/01/14 18:50:34 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>