4 ms·
This book was an important part in my learning of Lisp, along with Common Lisp the Language 2ed. It did leave me with a few biases that took a while to overcom
by EdwardCoffin 1y ago
This book was an important part in my learning of Lisp, along with Common Lisp the Language 2ed. It did leave me with a few biases that took a while to overcome though, like biases against CLOS and verbose names.
I consider this book to be almost like a forerunner of the style of book that JavaScript: the Good Bits is, in that it is advocating one's use of a language to a particular subset rather being an impartial description of the whole language.
- aarestad 1y agoSame, and I actually learned from this book in a class from this very professor!
- f1shy 1y agoAnd probably the aversion to loop facility…
- EdwardCoffin 1y agoWell to be fair I already had that aversion, though I will use that on occasion. Ironically enough I am an aficionado of the Waters series facility [1], which requires one to write Loop definitions for certain constructs (like defining new producing forms), so my efforts to avoid using Loop led to me using it. I think Loop doesn't deserve the hate it gets. I don't particularly like it, but I don't dislike it that much. [1] https://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node347.html https://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node347.html
- dapperdrake 1y agoShameless plug: I got SERIES to work with parenscript. Way better than expected.
- TurboHaskal 1y agoIt's funny how I started this way as well, and a decade later my Common Lisp code couldn't be more procedural and CLOS and LOOP heavy.