3 ms·

I think troad is trying to explain how they feel about learning CL and what they've discovered. They aren't criticising CL. Of course naming things over a long

I think troad is trying to explain how they feel about learning CL and what they've discovered. They aren't criticising CL. Of course naming things over a long period of time is a complex problem, that's why they acknowledged that there is a lot of cruft from the 60s. I've found their comments, and the constructive responses to them, interesting because I am interested in Lisp but have never learned it. What I don't find interesting is seeing troad's observations strongly challenged, as you are doing, as if somehow by sharing their observations, they now owe us detailed solutions as well. It's not cool.

kgwgk 2y ago
Fair enough. In fact I agree with the broad point that having functions that do things is a source of bugs and CL is a huge language with less than perfect names. My point is that having less functions that do less things does not obviously reduce the number of bugs in the end if those things still need to be done. Anyway. I see how a logical argument may be out of place if the thread is understood about sharing feelings and not about challenging claims.