> Norvig's code is beautiful and very good Lisp. But it's so dense that it requires more lines of explanatory comments than actual functionality. I've thought

> Norvig's code is beautiful and very good Lisp. But it's so dense that it requires more lines of explanatory comments than actual functionality. I've thought the same. Just look at the comment for the `print-translations` function. Like yeah, the code is short, and I am sure it didn't take Peter long to write it: he's one of the best out there after all. But if this were real software, how long until the comment becomes out-of-sync with the implementation, due to negligence or simple laziness? Is it not safer, and a better use of time, to write code that itself reads more like that comment, which I'd guess would be the case with Java, and even more so with Python?