3 ms·
Wow, downvotes were faster than bullet. Care to elaborate?
by exim 14y ago
Wow, downvotes were faster than bullet.
Care to elaborate?
- Jach 14y agoThe likely cause here is a double-whammy of complaining about downvotes in a child comment, and a form of "what is posited without evidence can be rejected without evidence" that maps to downvoting comments without elaboration. What exactly makes you think the way you think regarding Common Lisp vs. Scheme vs. Clojure? What's a crowning example of Scheme's superiority over at http://hyperpolyglot.org/lisp http://hyperpolyglot.org/lisp ? Have you even read about what makes Clojure different from CL or Scheme so that you have an informed opinion? Not a bad place to start would be the official website, or perhaps the long article here: http://java.ociweb.com/mark/clojure/article.html http://java.ociweb.com/mark/clojure/article.html
- exim 14y agoYes, I know what differentiates Clojure from CL (or Scheme). What I'm saying is that it is possible to have most part of these goodies in non S-expr language. Except maybe homoiconicity and advanced macros (Although being S-expr is not required for homoiconicity (e.g. Prolog)).
- xaa 14y agoWell, your second statement was not really accurate or even really coherent. CL and Clojure both have relatively simple syntax compared to most mainstream languages because of their use of S-expressions. Although reader macros mean they aren't purely S-expressions. But the main reason that you're being downvoted is because this site tends to attract Lisp aficionados. Paul Graham is well-known for claiming that Lisp is better than all other languages: http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html