4 ms·
"part of why" vs. "it is why" -- the words I wrote vs the ones you have imagined It wasn't a dig at lisp BTW. Just pointing out that the combo of no typecheck
by georgia_peach 4y ago
"part of why" vs. "it is why" -- the words I wrote vs the ones you have imagined
It wasn't a dig at lisp BTW. Just pointing out that the combo of no typechecking + such a homogeneous syntax is going to make it harder for the new guy to find his bearings in the codebase.
In your examples objects are idiomatic, and give the new devs some idea of what they're dealing with outside of runtime. I know lisp supports objects, but I wouldn't call them idiomatic from the lisp I've seen.
And as for typechecking, the writing has been on the wall for PHP (first Hack, now native type declarations) & Javascript (Typescript anyone?) for some time now.