- First name:  Pedro 
  
 - Last name:  Pinto 
  
 - Email address: REMOVED
  
 - Home page: 
  
 - Phone number(s): 
  
 - Postal code: 27516 
  
 - City:  Chapel Hill, NC 
  
 - Country:  US 
  
 - Organization(s) you work for or study at 
    
 - Fields of interest 
  Finance, mail systems, .NET integration, GUI Frameworks, database 
  access frameworks. 
  
 - Have you written any Lisp-related papers? If so, please supply 
  bibliographical references (and URL's, if possible). 
Pedro Pinto. "Dot-Scheme: A PLT Scheme FFI for the .NET 
framework". Scheme Workshop 2003. November 2003 
  http://www.rivendell.ws/dot-scheme/scheme-workshop-2003-paper.pdf 
    
 - Have you developed or participated in the development of any 
  Lisp-related programs or libraries? If so, please supply a URL, 
  if possible. 
  http://www.rivendell.ws/dot-scheme/ 
  
 - Lisp variants you have used (e.g. Common Lisp, Scheme, Dylan): 
  Scheme 
  
 - Lisp variants you're currently using or intend to use in the 
  near future: 
  Scheme 
  
 - Lisp implementations you have used 
  (e.g. CMUCL, Lispworks, Allegro Common Lisp): 
  Lispworks, PLT Scheme, briefly ACL 
  
 - Lisp implementations you're currently using or intend to use 
  in the near future: 
  PLT Scheme 
  
 - Computer platforms on which you're using or deploying Lisp: 
  MS Windows 
  
 - Number of years of experience with Lisp: 
  2 
  
 - Do you use Lisp: 
  - at work (if so, how much) 
   a little, some scriptting 
  
  - for study (if so, how much) 
   yes, use scheme to explore DSL's 
  
  - as a hobby (if so, how much) 
   yes, a lot. 
  
 - Are you using Lisp as much as you would like to? 
  If not, why not? 
   no, cannot use it at work: coleagues are not familiar with it, 
   small libraries (when compared with Java/C#). 
  
 - Do you see any obstacles to further Lisp growth (if so, what 
  is the biggest obstacle in your opinion)? 
   Yes, Common Lisp is great but the standard does not cover 
   enough to write modern applications (i.e. apps with GUIs, 
   network access, database manipulation, integration with OS 
   facilities). To write this kind of code one is forced to select an 
   implementation with the appropriate extensions. This fragments 
   an already small user base and makes it unlikley that large, 
   community supported, libraries will get implemented. 
  
   An improvement to this state of affairs would be to standardize bindings 
   to platforms like Win32, Java or .NET. Portable Lisp abstractions 
   could then be built on top of those. 
  
   Scheme suffers from similar problems and also from lack of 
   commercial implementations. 
  
- Would you be interested in a Lisp-related job or contract work? 
   definitly. 
  
 - Is your organization interested in hiring Lisp programmers? 
   no. 
  
 - Are you currently participating in Lisp-related meetings? 
   no 
  If not, would you be interested in such meetings? 
   yes.