Really, though, "Lisp" in this context means "Lisp at its best."
I'm not sure it does, so much as an ideal Lisp which Common Lisp and historical Lisp practice only imperfectly embody. For example, I think Clojure only recently discovered how Lisp macros are really supposed to be done -- I suspect the use of namespaces for hygene represents almost as much of a watershed moment as the switch to predominantly lexical scoping. Now that we've got about a century of art in terms of the design of turing-complete languages (counting the programs written for the Analytical Engine), it's become fairly evident that ideal-Lisp is a very significant attractor in language design. Probably not the only one -- ML/Prolog hint at another attractor out there. But in any case we can get closer to it than "Lisp at its best".
no subject
I'm not sure it does, so much as an ideal Lisp which Common Lisp and historical Lisp practice only imperfectly embody. For example, I think Clojure only recently discovered how Lisp macros are really supposed to be done -- I suspect the use of namespaces for hygene represents almost as much of a watershed moment as the switch to predominantly lexical scoping. Now that we've got about a century of art in terms of the design of turing-complete languages (counting the programs written for the Analytical Engine), it's become fairly evident that ideal-Lisp is a very significant attractor in language design. Probably not the only one -- ML/Prolog hint at another attractor out there. But in any case we can get closer to it than "Lisp at its best".