4 ms·
I think needing to use such operators is already indicative of inadequate tools to express structure. And if I did need to use something as complex as `cadadar
by aninhumer 10y ago
I think needing to use such operators is already indicative of inadequate tools to express structure.
And if I did need to use something as complex as `cadadar` frequently for some reason, I'd much rather give it a name (and a type) that expresses what I'm actually doing with it.
- Turing_Machine 10y agoWell, the point is not that you use cadadar all the time as such, but that you also use cdddar, caadr, and so on, and that having these shorthand forms available means that you don't have to define a whole bunch of one-off functions.
- aninhumer 10y agoI think saying you can use `cadadar` to operate on a data structure instead of defining an accessor is like saying you can use pointer arithmetic to work with data structures in C instead of using structs. EDIT: And as other people have mentioned, most serious lisps already have proper tools for building data-structures, so I'm inclined to think that if you're using `cadadar` you're probably doing something wrong.
- Turing_Machine 10y ago"I'm inclined to think that if you're using `cadadar` you're probably doing something wrong." That's nice. I'm inclined to think that you haven't written very much Lisp code.