3 ms·

well JavaScript if you're willing to buy into the idea that it's scheme in c syntax, which isn't actually that far off. But no, genuine lisps come with parenth

well JavaScript if you're willing to buy into the idea that it's scheme in c syntax, which isn't actually that far off. But no, genuine lisps come with parentheses (or some equivalent) because, as the name suggests, the entire point is list processing. Lisp programs are just data without (much) syntax. The more syntax you add, the less of a lisp it is.

gumby 3y ago
> well JavaScript if you're willing to buy into the idea that it's scheme in c syntax, which isn't actually that far off. It is quite far off. Just look at the version of "SICP in Javascript" (of which Julie Sussman was even one of the authors). The important points of the book are obscured by all the boilerplate and workarounds for the poor expressivity of the language.
- behnamoh 3y ago
  Could it be that JS has poor expressivity for the concepts discussed in SICP, but good expressivity as a general scripting language[0]? Same thing for Python. [0] And conversely, Scheme doesn't have good expressivity as a scripting language.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Given Lisp Machines and Interlisp-D, I would state the issue with Scheme is more related to lack of tooling.
  - gumby 3y ago
    Scheme has better expressivity (or more expressive power if you want to put it that way) but there’s a higher gain mismatch between its syntax and the things people usually script these days. Scripting languages are tightly coupled to the language they are scripting.