4 ms·
The mention of Arc really dates it. I'm disappointed that pg moved on from it so quickly, there was a lot of hype around Arc during its conception but now I rar
by mepian 3y ago
The mention of Arc really dates it. I'm disappointed that pg moved on from it so quickly, there was a lot of hype around Arc during its conception but now I rarely hear about it even though I follow everything Lisp-related obsessively.
- PheonixPharts 3y agoAt least for me, part of the allure of the Lisp way of thinking is that it's perfectly okay, even desirable, to whip up an entire language just for one project. My favorite part of SICP is this quote: > It is no exaggeration to regard this as the most fundamental idea in programming: The evaluator, which determines the meaning of expressions in a programming language, is just another program. >To appreciate this point is to change our images of ourselves as programmers. We come to see ourselves as designers of languages, rather than only users of languages designed by others. For me, Arc primarily being used for writing HN is not a sign of failure, but a great example of why Lisps are cool and can really lead to revolutionary thinking.
- mepian 3y agoThere is a distinction between making a new metalanguage, and making a new embedded language in an existing metalanguage. SICP and others promote the latter, while Arc (from my recollection) was supposed to be the former - the next big metalanguage.
- Zambyte 3y agoSICP definitely promotes both. The latter could be done without ever writing eval, which is the climax of the book.