<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Ben Atkin's Weblog - Latest Comments in Common Lisp: First Impressions</title><link>http://benatkin.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://benatkin.disqus.com/common_lisp_first_impressions/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:23:16 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Common Lisp: First Impressions</title><link>http://www.benatkin.com/weblog/?p=38#comment-4603204</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Good point. After reading your comment I realized that I used "list" as an argument in my own code. It's nice to not have to worry about an argument shadowing a function or macro in Common Lisp.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ben Atkin</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:23:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Common Lisp: First Impressions</title><link>http://www.benatkin.com/weblog/?p=38#comment-4603203</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It's not commonly bad style to have a function and variable sharing the same name. If "list" is the best name for a variable, CL programmers don't hesitate to use it. When writing an automobile-related application, they wouldn't hesitate to use CARs all the time.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Zach Beane</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:23:40 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>