5 ms·

Oh hey! Nice to see this on the front page here. I love Janet -- I've been using it for about year and a half, and it's now my go-to scripting language when I n

Oh hey! Nice to see this on the front page here. I love Janet -- I've been using it for about year and a half, and it's now my go-to scripting language when I need something more powerful than bash, or when I want to hack on goofy little side project (some examples in my profile). Parsing expression grammars (think, like, declarative parser combinators?) are a really great feature for ad-hoc text parsing -- and nicer than regular expressions, in my opinion, for anything longer than about ten characters. The language itself is also a great introductory language-with-lots-of-parentheses, so you can explore compile-time metaprogramming with familiar runtime semantics -- think JavaScript plus value types minus all the wats. The embeddability and easy distribution (compiles to a static binary on any platform) is a huge plus as well. Honestly I like Janet so much that I'm writing a book about it, because I think it's a shame that the language isn't more well-known. It's great! You should check it out right now!

mike_hock 4y ago
I went there, saw the Lisp syntax, and noped back out.
- dunefox 4y ago
  Your loss.
- co_dh 4y ago
  Me too
- malodyets 4y ago
  Nope as a verb is new to me - just heard it for the second time this week. First time was from my child.
  - adrusi 4y ago
    It's somewhat youthful internet slang. You'd hear it at the American public highschool I was at 12 years ago.
- sergiotapia 4y ago
  Same reaction here... wow that is a rough looking language. Then again I always disliked those kinds of languages like Clojure. The syntax is just too much for me. I feel like if I used it, it would atrophy my skills in other more traditional languages.
  - nnadams 4y ago
    I've been using Lisp for hobby projects for a few years. Yes the syntax takes some time, but > I feel like if I used it, it would atrophy my skills in other more traditional languages. was not the case for me at all. If you go into a text editor and remove all the parentheses, I find that's how Lisp programmers tend to see Lisp, (function argument) isn't that far from function(argument). Learning Lisp has only improved my skills as a programmer, after getting ideas like code as data, macros, let over lambda, CLOS and the metaobject protocol. It's a simple model that to me shows how other languages have picked an abstraction and stuck with it, but Lisp has all the tools to implement those abstractions and more. More mainstream languages are great at focusing the developer, and that makes them very practical. It is amusing though to watch many of the "new features" in languages come out even though Lisp had them years ago.
    - asyd 4y ago
      Reading Peter Norvig's PAIP (https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp) in 1998 totally blew my mind. It completely changed how I think about programming in every other language I use(d). I love it still, and always will. And yes, my experience is the same as yours: learning lisp made me a better programmer in every other language I use (especially -- but not only -- Python). The simplicity and symmetry of the syntax is a big part of that love for me. Being able to manipulate lisp code as lisp data, using the full power of the language to do so, is just brilliant. Janet looks lovely! Looking forward to the book.
  - mypetocean 4y ago
    The funny thing is that it's _not_ more parentheses, roughly, than one would expect to find in any Algol/C-inspired language, like C# or JavaScript. The opening paren is simply relocated to the other side of the function name or keyword. What we're experiencing is just a cognitive bias which causes us to prefer the more familiar over the less familiar ([the mere-exposure effect, also called the familiarity principle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect)). I've never used a Lisp-family language, but I find the reaction against parentheses to be overblown. The reading order of the code is also _consistent,_ rather than the frequent switching between infix notation, prefix notation, and postfix notation which we have to learn and parse in most languages outside the Lisp family. This is a benefit which deceptively looks like it is _more_ complicated, despite being simpler to parse visually (and otherwise). Another example of the familiarity principle at work.
- pmoriarty 4y ago
  Lisp syntax is a huge plus for me, and if a language doesn't have it I know it's not for me.
- camdez 4y ago
  Agreed. This is why I don't do any math I can't do on my fingers. Parentheses are just too scary, and there's no way that parenthesis math junk actually has any useful ideas.
  - ravi-delia 4y ago
    I understand the reaction, but some people feel just as negatively about parentheses as lispers feel positively. If I can feel positively about a language purely because of the parens, it's no sillier to feel negatively for the same reason.
    - camdez 4y ago
      I actually agree with that entirely, and the point of my jest was just to say that we should look deeper for the important ideas, not refuse to read the book because we don't like the color of the cover. Lispers don't feel positive about Lisp because of parentheses; change them to curly braces or brackets or ^ and $—that's really not what matters. Lisps with brackets go all the way back to the beginning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression). Indentation-based Lisps have been done too (https://readable.sourceforge.io/ https://readable.sourceforge.io/). The point is an expression-based syntax that directly models the code tree, is written in the data structures of language, and is convenient for meta-programming. It's a fundamentally different approach that yields massive benefits (see my other comment in the thread if you want to hear that spelled out in more detail). But we don't see that when we just stop at unfamiliar syntax. Lispers have been structurally-editing code as a matter of course since at least 1970. Most of the rest of the world only got a taste of that when tree-sitter came out circa 2018 (I know I'm rounding the edges here, but the point stands). Half a century later! Why is that? It's not just curly braces vs parens—something deeper is happening here. I do apologize if I came off rude. I'm just so frustrated at hearing this same line year after year after year from people who are missing out some of the most powerful ideas in programming because they prefer this ASCII glyph over that one. It's nothing more than parochialism. It just makes me want to scream (perhaps uncharitably) "surely you're not a serious engineer who works on serious problems if your biggest concern while coding is which character is used to group code?!" I want tools to help me think more clearly, ways to operate at higher levels of abstraction, better concurrency semantics—surface characteristics be damned. Sure, I have my preferences about orthography, but the tail doesn't wag the dog. Look deeper! Learn what each language has to teach you! Then keep the parts that move our craft forward and use whatever glyphs you want. But don't reject the automobile because it doesn't have handlebars. Moreover, the things that look familiar probably have the least to teach you. I believe we have the ability to do so much better as an industry, but it's not going to happen if we reject the unfamiliar just for being so.
weavie 4y ago
Is there somewhere I can keep up to date with books progress?
- ianthehenry 4y ago
  I'll announce it on my RSS feed/newsletter/twitter once it's done, if you use any of those. I'd estimate that it'll be out by the end of March; I won't write any public updates until it's ready for people to read.
  - weavie 4y ago
    Look forward to it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

mike_hock 4y ago

I went there, saw the Lisp syntax, and noped back out.

dunefox 4y ago
Your loss.
co_dh 4y ago
Me too
malodyets 4y ago
Nope as a verb is new to me - just heard it for the second time this week. First time was from my child.
- adrusi 4y ago
  It's somewhat youthful internet slang. You'd hear it at the American public highschool I was at 12 years ago.
sergiotapia 4y ago
Same reaction here... wow that is a rough looking language. Then again I always disliked those kinds of languages like Clojure. The syntax is just too much for me. I feel like if I used it, it would atrophy my skills in other more traditional languages.
- nnadams 4y ago
  I've been using Lisp for hobby projects for a few years. Yes the syntax takes some time, but > I feel like if I used it, it would atrophy my skills in other more traditional languages. was not the case for me at all. If you go into a text editor and remove all the parentheses, I find that's how Lisp programmers tend to see Lisp, (function argument) isn't that far from function(argument). Learning Lisp has only improved my skills as a programmer, after getting ideas like code as data, macros, let over lambda, CLOS and the metaobject protocol. It's a simple model that to me shows how other languages have picked an abstraction and stuck with it, but Lisp has all the tools to implement those abstractions and more. More mainstream languages are great at focusing the developer, and that makes them very practical. It is amusing though to watch many of the "new features" in languages come out even though Lisp had them years ago.
  - asyd 4y ago
    Reading Peter Norvig's PAIP (https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp) in 1998 totally blew my mind. It completely changed how I think about programming in every other language I use(d). I love it still, and always will. And yes, my experience is the same as yours: learning lisp made me a better programmer in every other language I use (especially -- but not only -- Python). The simplicity and symmetry of the syntax is a big part of that love for me. Being able to manipulate lisp code as lisp data, using the full power of the language to do so, is just brilliant. Janet looks lovely! Looking forward to the book.
- mypetocean 4y ago
  The funny thing is that it's _not_ more parentheses, roughly, than one would expect to find in any Algol/C-inspired language, like C# or JavaScript. The opening paren is simply relocated to the other side of the function name or keyword. What we're experiencing is just a cognitive bias which causes us to prefer the more familiar over the less familiar ([the mere-exposure effect, also called the familiarity principle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect)). I've never used a Lisp-family language, but I find the reaction against parentheses to be overblown. The reading order of the code is also _consistent,_ rather than the frequent switching between infix notation, prefix notation, and postfix notation which we have to learn and parse in most languages outside the Lisp family. This is a benefit which deceptively looks like it is _more_ complicated, despite being simpler to parse visually (and otherwise). Another example of the familiarity principle at work.
pmoriarty 4y ago
Lisp syntax is a huge plus for me, and if a language doesn't have it I know it's not for me.
camdez 4y ago
Agreed. This is why I don't do any math I can't do on my fingers. Parentheses are just too scary, and there's no way that parenthesis math junk actually has any useful ideas.
- ravi-delia 4y ago
  I understand the reaction, but some people feel just as negatively about parentheses as lispers feel positively. If I can feel positively about a language purely because of the parens, it's no sillier to feel negatively for the same reason.
  - camdez 4y ago
    I actually agree with that entirely, and the point of my jest was just to say that we should look deeper for the important ideas, not refuse to read the book because we don't like the color of the cover. Lispers don't feel positive about Lisp because of parentheses; change them to curly braces or brackets or ^ and $—that's really not what matters. Lisps with brackets go all the way back to the beginning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression). Indentation-based Lisps have been done too (https://readable.sourceforge.io/ https://readable.sourceforge.io/). The point is an expression-based syntax that directly models the code tree, is written in the data structures of language, and is convenient for meta-programming. It's a fundamentally different approach that yields massive benefits (see my other comment in the thread if you want to hear that spelled out in more detail). But we don't see that when we just stop at unfamiliar syntax. Lispers have been structurally-editing code as a matter of course since at least 1970. Most of the rest of the world only got a taste of that when tree-sitter came out circa 2018 (I know I'm rounding the edges here, but the point stands). Half a century later! Why is that? It's not just curly braces vs parens—something deeper is happening here. I do apologize if I came off rude. I'm just so frustrated at hearing this same line year after year after year from people who are missing out some of the most powerful ideas in programming because they prefer this ASCII glyph over that one. It's nothing more than parochialism. It just makes me want to scream (perhaps uncharitably) "surely you're not a serious engineer who works on serious problems if your biggest concern while coding is which character is used to group code?!" I want tools to help me think more clearly, ways to operate at higher levels of abstraction, better concurrency semantics—surface characteristics be damned. Sure, I have my preferences about orthography, but the tail doesn't wag the dog. Look deeper! Learn what each language has to teach you! Then keep the parts that move our craft forward and use whatever glyphs you want. But don't reject the automobile because it doesn't have handlebars. Moreover, the things that look familiar probably have the least to teach you. I believe we have the ability to do so much better as an industry, but it's not going to happen if we reject the unfamiliar just for being so.

weavie 4y ago

Is there somewhere I can keep up to date with books progress?

ianthehenry 4y ago
I'll announce it on my RSS feed/newsletter/twitter once it's done, if you use any of those. I'd estimate that it'll be out by the end of March; I won't write any public updates until it's ready for people to read.
- weavie 4y ago
  Look forward to it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]