3 ms·

Right. Mainstream languages have been gradually evolving towards Lisp but until they adopt a simple uniform syntax they won't get real macros, which I think is

Right. Mainstream languages have been gradually evolving towards Lisp but until they adopt a simple uniform syntax they won't get real macros, which I think is the biggest difference between Lisp and other languages today.

DrJokepu 17y ago
I believe that appreciating Lisp's minimalistic, tree-like syntax requires a very mathematical way of thinking. Many (perhaps most) developers have a different way of thinking. There's nothing wrong with that, diversity is a good thing but because of that, I don't think that the S-Expression syntax will ever become "mainstream".
- abstractbill 17y ago
  I think I agree... I'm undecided though. I actually find JSON to be a positive development, and potentially a step in this direction (i.e. the fact that people now use javascript literal data syntax as a way of serializing general data, and the syntax has been written down somewhere quite carefully and is not too verbose or ugly - at least compared to something like xml). Who knows how far the mainstream will take this though...
- lispm 17y ago
  It is already. XML is full of prefix, nested syntax.
  - abstractbill 17y ago
    Yes, but nobody would seriously write a programming language that used XML for its syntax.
    - lispm 17y ago
      So you say existing XML-based programming languages were 'written' by non-serious people? 'Water': <defmethod test_true source=required="ek_string"> <try <if> source.<execute_string/>.<not/> <concat "Busted: "source/>.<print/> else “OK” </if> > <concat "Errored: " source/>.<print/> </try> </defmethod> See also XSLT, XL, RuleML, ...
      - abstractbill 17y ago
        So you say existing XML-based programming languages were 'written' by non-serious people? Whether or not the people who wrote (sorry, I guess "designed" is the more appropriate word) these languages were serious, I do believe they are a dead-end.
  - dmoney 17y ago
    I think a better word would be "outfix".

DrJokepu 17y ago

I believe that appreciating Lisp's minimalistic, tree-like syntax requires a very mathematical way of thinking. Many (perhaps most) developers have a different way of thinking. There's nothing wrong with that, diversity is a good thing but because of that, I don't think that the S-Expression syntax will ever become "mainstream".

abstractbill 17y ago
I think I agree... I'm undecided though. I actually find JSON to be a positive development, and potentially a step in this direction (i.e. the fact that people now use javascript literal data syntax as a way of serializing general data, and the syntax has been written down somewhere quite carefully and is not too verbose or ugly - at least compared to something like xml). Who knows how far the mainstream will take this though...
lispm 17y ago
It is already. XML is full of prefix, nested syntax.
- abstractbill 17y ago
  Yes, but nobody would seriously write a programming language that used XML for its syntax.
  - lispm 17y ago
    So you say existing XML-based programming languages were 'written' by non-serious people? 'Water': <defmethod test_true source=required="ek_string"> <try <if> source.<execute_string/>.<not/> <concat "Busted: "source/>.<print/> else “OK” </if> > <concat "Errored: " source/>.<print/> </try> </defmethod> See also XSLT, XL, RuleML, ...
    - abstractbill 17y ago
      So you say existing XML-based programming languages were 'written' by non-serious people? Whether or not the people who wrote (sorry, I guess "designed" is the more appropriate word) these languages were serious, I do believe they are a dead-end.
- dmoney 17y ago
  I think a better word would be "outfix".