4 ms·
I don't think RPN is as simple as parenthesis. All RPN does is replace the easy to get right parenthesis with difficult to get right newline characters.
by quantadev 1y ago
I don't think RPN is as simple as parenthesis.
All RPN does is replace the easy to get right parenthesis with difficult to get right newline characters.
- lproven 1y agoReverse Polish notation is every bit as easy, simple and minimal as Lispian prefix notation. They are mirror images of one another... and for most ordinary people, both are equally difficult to read or to use. And I include myself in this. Remember that for a lot of ordinary people, school algebra is almost impossible to follow and is the reason they stop studying maths as soon as they can. And that is simple infix notation.
- quantadev 1y ago> RPN is every bit as easy [as LISP] Riddle me this then: When editing code full of parentheticals, why do devs find it helpful that IDEs can find and highlight the matching opening/closing parenthesis automatically? I mean, based on your logic, parenthesis just don't make things any easier, right? I'll leave the topic of "indentation" completely off the table too, because a single riddle is enough.
- lproven 1y agoI don't know what side you think I am arguing for here, but it's not the one you're guessing.
- quantadev 1y agoYeah, I did't think you ever genuinely believed RPN is easier than LISP.
- lproven 1y agoNo, that is not true. Me personally? I dislike them both. I find them both unreadable. But both are compact and efficient... just really difficult. You are trying to put words in my mouth that are not there. That is very rude. Do not do that, ever. But also, as you have been throughout this thread, you are wrong.
- quantadev 1y agoThe parenthesis in LISP make it dramatically easier to deal with than RPN; and I don't believe for a millisecond that you objectively disagree with that fact.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]