My point was exactly that the allowed usage you propose, where Emacs Lisp is a Lisp and Clojure, for instance, is not, is quite ridiculous. The disallowed usage, "Which Lisp should I use, Clojure or Common Lisp?" is…
But the question "Which Lisp" is entirely meaningful, more so than even the question, more acceptable by your definitions, "Should I program in in Emacs or Common Lisp?" The programmer asking "Which Lisp?" might very…
I find this to be unnecessarily prescriptive, as are almost all purely semantic assertions about what should be (semantic used in its weak, normal language sense here). It is certainly true that Schemes and Clojures and…
My point was exactly that the allowed usage you propose, where Emacs Lisp is a Lisp and Clojure, for instance, is not, is quite ridiculous. The disallowed usage, "Which Lisp should I use, Clojure or Common Lisp?" is…
But the question "Which Lisp" is entirely meaningful, more so than even the question, more acceptable by your definitions, "Should I program in in Emacs or Common Lisp?" The programmer asking "Which Lisp?" might very…
I find this to be unnecessarily prescriptive, as are almost all purely semantic assertions about what should be (semantic used in its weak, normal language sense here). It is certainly true that Schemes and Clojures and…