On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 12:00:50 -0200 Pedro wrote: > I could sea the advantage of re-writing lily in only one language. but > this language would have to have a fast implementation and be dynamic > and very high-level. I can't think of a better choice than common > lisp ;-)
If it's not a sarcasm then you must be a nice creative person to ask: how did you learn Lisp? I guess you weren't interested in string-handling? Or is there a CommonLisp "substring" function? How do you "think" (invent, construct) control-flow if Scheme (and Lisp?) uses only tail-recursion as a flow-control mechanism? /Thanks in advance from Donald -- dax2-tele2adsl:dk -- http://d-axel.dk/ Donald Axel _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
