40 ms·
The high level description sounds a bit like Clojure...? Both sound very tied to the datastructures and built in algorithms provided. As long as your problem ma
by geokon 5y ago
The high level description sounds a bit like Clojure...? Both sound very tied to the datastructures and built in algorithms provided. As long as your problem maps well to the built in tool it's very terse (in a very good way!). I find this makes coding much more productive. Most languages avoid committing that way
Would be curious to hear from someone's that's used both
- rak1507 5y agoYeah, I've not used lisps much myself but it's definitely similar. See https://kparc.com/lisp.txt https://kparc.com/lisp.txt. The quote by Alan Perlis, 'It is better to have 100 functions operate on one data structure than 10 functions on 10 data structures.' is also relevant to both lisp dialects and array languages.
- geokon 5y agoOh, of course. Lisp is maybe a more natural analogue. I guess Clojure takes things a step further. It goes from "everything is a list" to something slightly broader with Vectors/Maps/Sets/etc. - all through language primitives. (the algorithmic layer is cleverly done through the sequence abstraction) Coming from C++, in effect having your STL containers/algos baked into the language is a breath of fresh air :)
- rak1507 5y agoGood maps + sets + other data structures is definitely something that I miss occasionally in array languages. I should look into Clojure more, I've heard lots of good things about it.