3 ms·
Good luck reading Thomas Mann or Hermann Hesse in German... Any modern fiction. No chance.
by lispm 10y ago
Good luck reading Thomas Mann or Hermann Hesse in German...
Any modern fiction. No chance.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agorolls eyes Not German, Clojure. Clojure is pretty easy.
- lispm 10y agoReally? You must be really good at Clojure. Then you can explain this: user=> (list 1 2 3) (1 2 3) user=> (list? (list 1 2 3)) true so (1 2 3) is a list. user=> (cons 0 (list 1 2 3)) (0 1 2 3) user=> (list? (cons 0 (list 1 2 3))) false (0 1 2 3) is not a list? user=> (list? '(0 1 2 3)) true But then it is??? WTF? Compare ELISP: ELISP> (listp (list 1 2 3)) t ELISP> (listp (cons 0 (list 1 2 3))) t and CL: CL-USER> (listp (list 1 2 3)) T CL-USER> (listp (cons 0 (list 1 2 3))) T
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoThat's pretty screwed up, but having brain-damged function naming doesn't mean it's not lisp. And a few odd corners does not illegability make.
- kazinator 10y agoTry TXR Lisp; you will be charmed. http://www.nongnu.org/txr http://www.nongnu.org/txr
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoThanks kaz, but I've already got the manpage bookmarked. I haven't looked at it in-depth yet, but it seems to be awk, but better, which is pretty awesome.
- kazinator 10y agoYou can also completely ignore the "awk-but-different" TXR pattern-based extraction language, and just use it as a Lisp, too. The REPL is nothing but Lisp, and code stored in ".tl" files is treated as Lisp. TXR Lisp is designed to be a nice Lisp dialect on its own, not to just fill in the gaps in another language.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoWell, yeah, but why have one awesome thing when you can have two? I have to finish reading the docs, so I know how it works, though.