feelsboutlisps

5 ms·

1.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> Lisp has sensible norms Again, in your opinion. And sorry to start blunt because I'm trying to round this out as we're getting nowhere :) To me, writing my code like it's an AST, amid a ton of parens is not sensible. I&#
2.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
I'm not arguing your opinions are anything other than your opinions. I don't agree with them however.
3.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
I don't think you can put those things on the same scale. I think it's telling that you dismiss Lisp's syntax like it's unimportant rather than acknowledging that it's the several hundred lb elephant in the room whe
4.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> You're just paying extra attention to the lisp ones. Because people in this thread are attempting to put-forward lisps' macros (and writing code as an AST) as some big win, without acknowledging that it comes with a massive c
5.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> But that was just an example: there are things python will never have that you can add to lisp yourself. I don't want to. I want a language that has sensible norms. > As for your theory that macros make code harder to understan
6.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> No. Lack of macros makes code bigger, more error prone and harder to understand. I mean, that's provably not true. Or at least not provably true. Let's me throw out at alternative statement: Macros make code harder to underst
7.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> Getting rid of tons of syntax is not a sacrifice at all Getting rid of syntax that usefully expresses common cases absolutely is a sacrifice. What was that Turing tar pit thing about making things of interest easy? Lisp is powerful, bu
8.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> But, as long as Python is not homoiconic, it will never be as simple to express these ideas as it is in Lisp But it'll be way simpler to express literally every other day-to-day concept, whereas lisps will continue to be inexpress
9.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> Also, the syntax is one of the best parts about Lisp. I think you're in the minority there. I would hope most people agree that Lisp 'sacrifices syntax in the name of homoiconicity'. If not, then we have different defini
10.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> Macros are a language tool that lets you build abstractions, in some cases imo allowing better abstractions than would be possible without macros I guess 'better' is the operative word I question here. You're creating sy
11.
by feelsboutlisps 10y ago
> Macros I don't want my teammates writing macros. When the whole programming community constantly talks about situations within regular, more expressive languages (with syntax) like Python et al, where teammates look at each others