5 ms·

I disagree. You say so because you're used to Python. In Python you need to remember quite a few syntax rules. How many different symbols you need to write a re

by m0skit0 11y ago

I disagree. You say so because you're used to Python. In Python you need to remember quite a few syntax rules. How many different symbols you need to write a relatively complex program? How many symbols/words are reserved? In LISPs there's much less syntax to remember.

whostolemyhat 11y ago
Yep, in Lisp all you need to remember is (). Python has more syntax to remember than in Lisp, but ends up being a lot more readable (eg lists, dicts etc)
- SSLy 11y ago
  > lists, dicts Clojure does them right, imho.
  - falcolas 11y ago
    And uses the same symbols as Python, Ruby, and a number of other high level programming languages.
    - m0skit0 11y ago
      No, it doesn't. In fact, you can avoid them if you wish and build everything from simple lists. Point being: I don't have to remember a specific syntax for "for" loop, or for equality (==)...
- m0skit0 11y ago
  I don't really see how having to remember more symbols and syntax rules makes anything more readable. It doesn't. You have to know what those symbols mean, and the more there are, the less readable it is by definition because you need more knowledge to understand it. I understand it is more readable for YOU because you already have that knowledge. The same applies where English is readable for me but Chinese is not. If Chinese "syntax" was simpler, I could actually learn it way faster, as everyone else, which would make it more "readable" to everyone that has not previous knowledge, not just to YOU :)
jokoon 11y ago
so why am I failing to learn lisp ?
- JackMorgan 11y ago
  Are you failing to learn it? What have you tried? What's holding you back? I'm offering a free Clojure workshop next Saturday if you're in the Philadelphia region. http://www.meetup.com/Clojadelphia/events/221835485/ http://www.meetup.com/Clojadelphia/events/221835485/ Otherwise, I worked through SICP a couple years back, and I found it invaluable to getting familiar with Lisps and functional programming in general. I remember sitting down one day (before working through SICP) and saying, "I'm great at PHP, I'll probably just be able to write a Clojure project off the top of my head!" Cue clown music as I beat my head against a language much more expressive than anything I'd encountered to date. It was a few solid weeks of effort before I could get anywhere, but I remember remarking at the time, "if I can learn this well enough, I'll be a wizard!"
  - jokoon 11y ago
    sicp is pretty hardcore I tried reading lisp courses or tutorials, it really did not help. It's either too steep, or it just talks about simple things like adding numbers like (+ 5 9) I'm more into what makes me understand lisp as a better language.
    - JackMorgan 11y ago
      I've heard rave reviews of Joy of Clojure as a good book to "get it". I found I really had to work at the problem from several angles before it "clicked". I started with Land of Lisp, but it felt very arcane to me at the time. I would copy in code from the book, and then look back at just jibberish. I gave up on that a few chapters in. Then I made that site in Clojure, one error at a time, pounding like a monkey until it worked. I then read Clojure Programming twice, followed by working through Let Over Lambda. About halfway through Let Over Lambda, I think it "clicked". I finished with an amazing online course in Programming Languages through Brown University. I finished with SICP chapters 1-3. Nothing worthwhile is ever easy. If you need any help please reach out, you can't waste my time.
willvarfar 11y ago
(old thread, sorry) Python is designed to be human readable. Here's an old blog post by me, which may be hard to jump into because its part of a longer conversation on proggit or something, but anyway: http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/18319031919/programming-language-readability http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/18319031919/progr...
- m0skit0 11y ago
  It fails. The more symbols and syntax rules you have, the less readable it is. I think this is pretty straightforward to understand :) Human language has pretty much non-existant symbols besides the alphabet.

by m0skit0 11y ago

whostolemyhat 11y ago

Yep, in Lisp all you need to remember is (). Python has more syntax to remember than in Lisp, but ends up being a lot more readable (eg lists, dicts etc)

SSLy 11y ago
> lists, dicts Clojure does them right, imho.
- falcolas 11y ago
  And uses the same symbols as Python, Ruby, and a number of other high level programming languages.
  - m0skit0 11y ago
    No, it doesn't. In fact, you can avoid them if you wish and build everything from simple lists. Point being: I don't have to remember a specific syntax for "for" loop, or for equality (==)...
m0skit0 11y ago
I don't really see how having to remember more symbols and syntax rules makes anything more readable. It doesn't. You have to know what those symbols mean, and the more there are, the less readable it is by definition because you need more knowledge to understand it. I understand it is more readable for YOU because you already have that knowledge. The same applies where English is readable for me but Chinese is not. If Chinese "syntax" was simpler, I could actually learn it way faster, as everyone else, which would make it more "readable" to everyone that has not previous knowledge, not just to YOU :)

jokoon 11y ago

so why am I failing to learn lisp ?

JackMorgan 11y ago
Are you failing to learn it? What have you tried? What's holding you back? I'm offering a free Clojure workshop next Saturday if you're in the Philadelphia region. http://www.meetup.com/Clojadelphia/events/221835485/ http://www.meetup.com/Clojadelphia/events/221835485/ Otherwise, I worked through SICP a couple years back, and I found it invaluable to getting familiar with Lisps and functional programming in general. I remember sitting down one day (before working through SICP) and saying, "I'm great at PHP, I'll probably just be able to write a Clojure project off the top of my head!" Cue clown music as I beat my head against a language much more expressive than anything I'd encountered to date. It was a few solid weeks of effort before I could get anywhere, but I remember remarking at the time, "if I can learn this well enough, I'll be a wizard!"
- jokoon 11y ago
  sicp is pretty hardcore I tried reading lisp courses or tutorials, it really did not help. It's either too steep, or it just talks about simple things like adding numbers like (+ 5 9) I'm more into what makes me understand lisp as a better language.
  - JackMorgan 11y ago
    I've heard rave reviews of Joy of Clojure as a good book to "get it". I found I really had to work at the problem from several angles before it "clicked". I started with Land of Lisp, but it felt very arcane to me at the time. I would copy in code from the book, and then look back at just jibberish. I gave up on that a few chapters in. Then I made that site in Clojure, one error at a time, pounding like a monkey until it worked. I then read Clojure Programming twice, followed by working through Let Over Lambda. About halfway through Let Over Lambda, I think it "clicked". I finished with an amazing online course in Programming Languages through Brown University. I finished with SICP chapters 1-3. Nothing worthwhile is ever easy. If you need any help please reach out, you can't waste my time.

willvarfar 11y ago

(old thread, sorry) Python is designed to be human readable. Here's an old blog post by me, which may be hard to jump into because its part of a longer conversation on proggit or something, but anyway: http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/18319031919/programming-language-readability http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/18319031919/progr...

m0skit0 11y ago
It fails. The more symbols and syntax rules you have, the less readable it is. I think this is pretty straightforward to understand :) Human language has pretty much non-existant symbols besides the alphabet.