4 ms·

I would take issue with the OOP in CL being better implemented than other languages. Don't get me wrong, the Metaobject Protocol is a feat of modern engineering

by hvs 12y ago

I would take issue with the OOP in CL being better implemented than other languages. Don't get me wrong, the Metaobject Protocol is a feat of modern engineering, but the actual result is an OOP that feels tacked on after the fact. CLOS is very powerful, but when it comes to OOP, other languages are syntactically cleaner in their implementations. Also, it's a bigger debate, but the lack of hygenic macros in CL is often seen as a negative. Again, this is a larger debate, but certainly a case can be made that CL doesn't have everything designed so well. I love CL, but it's helpful to remember its limitations.

mrottenkolber 12y ago
> syntactically cleaner in their implementations. Listen to yourself please. > lack of hygenic macros in CL Which lack? CL macros are usually very hygienic, being a Lisp-2 and all, having GENSYM. > I love CL, but it's helpful to remember its limitations. What limitations? Not having syntactical things you seem to like and supporting non-hygienic macros are not limitations. Quite on the opposite, I believe these are features.