I must of course address the elephant in the room: The choice of the word “perfect” to describe Scheme.

I gave a definition for what I perceive is perfection: The impossibility of reaching a limit in the extension of the language in question. In plain English, this means Infinite extensibility. And what I mean is that Scheme is perfectly extensible. The choice for this language comes from the definition of the word “perfect”: completed; not defective nor redundant; having all the properties or qualities requisite to its nature and kind; without flaw, fault, or blemish. That describes how extensibility is in Scheme, and that’s how I judge Scheme.

I don’t mean to say that any other language is by definition not perfect because Scheme is, or any such crap. Any language that’s infinitely extensible will also receive the praise of being perfect, by my definition. And my view of perfection has nothing to do here with subjective beauty or perceived elegance; it’s a precisely defined term rooted in objective criteria (provided in that article).

I hope that clears up the one serious misconception that may arise by reading this article’s title. I am not judging based on sentimental opinions; I’m being perfectly rational and logical here. Treat this article as such.