'Could' is the word. My example was that it was actually done to have built-in command loops and the building blocks for those (so that they could be used in programs), which could be invoked on demand while a program was running.
> it's pointless mocking a submission for being similar in design
I'm not mocking the submission. The feature is quite valuable and interacting with running software via command loops is great.
Ok, "was" then. Operating systems were originally written in assembly and you can't write an operating system without some kind of hardware polling and command loops (even in the days before multi-tasking systems).
Even earlier computers in the days before operating systems would have command loops written in giant rings of punched sheets that would slowly spin round on reels like a cambelt. So this isn't even an innovation that was born from assembly, let alone any high level language.
I honestly do get what you're saying and I'm not trying to dismiss your point that people did this kind of stuff in LISP but what you need to understand is that people did this in a great number of different ways, in different languages and even mechanically too.
'Could' is the word. My example was that it was actually done to have built-in command loops and the building blocks for those (so that they could be used in programs), which could be invoked on demand while a program was running.
> it's pointless mocking a submission for being similar in design
I'm not mocking the submission. The feature is quite valuable and interacting with running software via command loops is great.