Anonymous user
Talk:Function definition: Difference between revisions
reply re Lisp
(New section: Lisp, BASIC) |
(reply re Lisp) |
||
Line 28:
The QuickBasic language used in the example was already quite far away from the original BASIC language (no line numbers, true functions, named types, user-defined types).
* I disagree about Lisp, for the same kind of reason you consider BASIC not a single language, but it's not worth arguing over. I won't object if you readd the "Lisp" example. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 14:44, 1 March 2008 (MST)
| |||