3 ms·
Raganwald, you pretentious douche: > I wrote an implementation of Scheme in Java with macros, tail call optimization, lambda hoisting, a bunch of stuff. Green
by raganwald 15y ago
Raganwald, you pretentious douche:
> I wrote an implementation of Scheme in Java with macros, tail call optimization, lambda hoisting, a bunch of stuff.
Greenspun’s Tenth Law is widely accepted, demonstrations of it in action add nothing of value to the programming community. Furthermore, writing a Scheme in Java is likely to be a project where you learned nothing of interest about Lisp or about Java.
—signed, Nikolai Bourbaki
- apotheon 15y agoThat's kind of an inappropriate response. Pointing out one has implemented Scheme with all the bells and whistles as a condition in which the implementor is still interested in Lisp implementations and similar stuff is not a pretension or a statement that it was some kind of tremendous feat. I have a motorcycle, but I'm still interested in not only other motorcycles, but also bicycles. I don't think this makes me a pretentious douche.
- appamatto 15y agoMaybe he meant that his Java implementation of Scheme contains an ad-hoc implementation of Lisp.
- appamatto 15y agoMisapplication? I thought the Law was meant to describe accidental implementations of Lisp rather than overt ones. In other words, "the complicated system you made _just happens_ to contain a Lisp, and if you had noticed that requirement in the first place its design would have been cleaner."
- raganwald 15y agoI think you have captured the spirit of the law. The project in question was the development of a scripting language for something-or-other, so this wasn’t an accidental implementation of Lisp, it was done with malice aforethought.
- barrybe 15y agoWait.. why is raganwald replying to raganwald?