3 ms·
tl;dr: OP likes Eiffel. A perfectly reasonable post, but not a very interesting one. I could probably write something similar: - homoiconicity - tail-call
by jfb 14y ago
tl;dr: OP likes Eiffel.
A perfectly reasonable post, but not a very interesting one. I could probably write something similar:
- homoiconicity
- tail-call elimination
- s-expressions
Can you tell what my first language was?
- unimpressive 14y agoScheme?
- kenjackson 14y agoNope. Must be XML.
- jfb 14y agoXML used to be a very easy way for my coworkers to get a rise out of me. Thankfully, I haven't had to think about it since I left Apple.
- jfb 14y agoChicago's version of 6.001, straight from SICP.
- jQueryIsAwesome 14y agoClojure.
- jfb 14y agoI'm a little older than that. Also, the JVM precludes TCE.
- jQueryIsAwesome 14y agoWell, there is trampolines: http://clojuredocs.org/clojure_core/1.2.0/clojure.core/trampoline http://clojuredocs.org/clojure_core/1.2.0/clojure.core/tramp...
- jfb 14y agoWhich is useful, sure. But when you're conditioned to write in a tail-recursive style by the language environment, it still pulls one out of the flow. That said, I've only written Clojure for amusement, never on anything large, so it could simply be a matter of getting used to new convention. I'm also come around to strong, static type systems since my Scheme days, but that's a different kettle of fish entirely.