4 ms·
One of the things that slows me down is that whenever I see Lisp code, my mind goes to the equivalent Haskell code, and the comparison is basically never favora
by nolemurs 10y ago
One of the things that slows me down is that whenever I see Lisp code, my mind goes to the equivalent Haskell code, and the comparison is basically never favorable.
I'm a firm believer in the value of learning a functional language, and I totally understand that from a historical perspective Lisp is important, but does it really have much to recommend it over modern functional langauges?
- marcosdumay 10y agoLisp goes for its simplicity and metaprogramming power. I wouldn't recommend anybody to learn functional programming in it.
- platz 10y ago> my mind goes to the equivalent Haskell code yup, I was doing this too. notice also he did give a nod/mention in the post
- curuinor 10y agoThis is clojure so it seems damned modernish
- AnimalMuppet 10y agoYou can write functional code in Lisp. But Lisp isn't really a functional language. That is, you have to kind of fight the language to write non-functional code in Haskell. In Lisp, you don't. So if you learn Lisp, you learn a language that transcends programming style. It's much more universal than Haskell.
- platz 10y agoif you learn Lisp, you very quickly learn to lean heavily on macros, which is very much a programming style.
- rev_null 10y agoYeah, Church-encoding is a lot nicer to use when you can wrap the function in a new type.