> 
> This is, needless to say, something of a matter of opinion and historical
> interpretation. I wouldn't call LISP an FP language, though it is surely
> ancestral to many FP languages, and many FP concepts have their basis in
> LISP features.

Could you explain why Lisp isn't a FP language? I think among others
it is one. And the combination of features makes Lisp IMHO outstanding
even nowadays.

Regards
Friedrich

-- 
for e-mail reply remove all after .com 

Reply via email to