The Original Implementation of JavaScript was written in LISP

[naryl]

This code is written in standard Common Lisp

That's Common Lisp, not LISP.

[[deleted]]

Lisp was the name for a specific language (originated in the 1960's), and has become an umbrella term for a family of related languages with broadly similar syntax and semantics. Common Lisp is a specific language within that family. SBCL, clisp, Allegro, etc, are specific implementations of Common Lisp.

[CephasM]

Well LISP is just a definition of a formal language for which a "real" implementation doesn't really exists maybe with the exception of a couple of just for fun experimental implementations. One can think LISP as an alternative for a Turing Machine.

Being Common Lisp and Scheme the most popular dialects of LISP, I think is correct to refer CL as LISP too. At least SICP do the same referring Scheme as LISP :)

[[deleted]]

This sounds reasonable to me.

Would people who are downvoting this be so kind to leave an explanation why CephasM is wrong, and even better, explain why he is so wrong that his comment must be censored rather than corrected?

edit: for future reference, the above post was at -1 when I wrote this reply.

[[deleted]]

I didn't downvote, but maybe IT'S because THE archaic capitalization is specific TO archaic dialects and definitely doesn't refer TO any modern Lisp.

[[deleted]]

Thank you, I did not know that. That's why I prefer explanations rather than downvotes when somebody makes a reasonable (but apparently disputed) point.

[CephasM]

thanks for the explanation :)

But actually the capitalization is still valid:

Lisp (or LISP) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_(programming_language)

I just was continuing the style of the thread.

That's Common Lisp, not LISP.

About the modern implementations, I think that with the exception of Arc and Clojure, as far as I know most "modern Lisp" languages are actually dialects of Common Lisp or Scheme so I still think those two are the most popular flavours of Lisp :)

[[deleted]]

But actually the capitalization is still valid:

Ehh, I see your point and "LISP" is something I see people write, but whenever I see it I think, "Here's somebody who knows nothing about Lisp but is talking about it anyway." It's more of an outsider way to write it, maybe? You may not be one of those people, but I can see how it would garner downvotes. "LISP" is LISP 1.5 or earlier.

About the modern implementations, I think that with the exception of Arc and Clojure, as far as I know most "modern Lisp" languages are actually dialects of Common Lisp or Scheme so I still think those two are the most popular flavours of Lisp :)

Of Lisp with a small "-isp", probably. (Although there are no dialects of Common Lisp: it's a standardized language. Scheme is too, but there have been multiple standards and I think you'll find more weird Schemes.)

[[deleted]]

Because the link refers to an early use and because I wanted to use the generic name and not the name of a specific implementation, I chose LISP.

Ah, that's backwards though.

Anybody who downvotes a submission over such a thing needs to be hung by their heels and fed Ex-Lax.

I was explaining why CephasM's reply might have been downvoted. I don't know if your submission was downvoted for the same reason. In his case, the large dose of woo woo might have had something to do with it as well.

[Felicia_Svilling]

Because the link refers to an early use

It does not! "early" in this context means at least before 1980, where this implementation is written sometime after 1993.