Re: Why don't people like lisp?

From: David Steuber (david.steuber_at_verizon.net)
Date: 10/14/03 

Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:40:36 GMT

"Francis Avila" <francisgavila@yahoo.com> writes:

> Lisp, the language family (or whatever you want to call it), still
> has this stigma: lambda calculus is not a natural way of thinking.

My experience with other wannabe programmers is that any logical
thought for solving a problem is not a natural way of thinking. C++
is no better than Lisp for working out a problem. Python, Ruby,
Perl, et al, are not any better either.

I think the infix notation languages just seem more natural because
that is what more people are exposed to.

The HP calculators with RPN were never as popular either. But to
those who used them, RPN was far better than infix.

The PostScript language is also an RPN. If you have experience with
HP calculators, it is a drop dead simple language. However, the
postfix notation lacks the power of the prefix notation and
parenthesized grouping used in Lisp. ie

(+ 1 2 3 4 5)
vs
1 2 3 4 5 add add add add

Lisp has far simpler syntax than infix languages. The syntax is
almost, but not quite, as simple as assembler.

Try doing this in C++, Python, or whatever:

(do ((a 1 b) (b 1 (+ a b)))
     (nil a)
     (print a))

You will need to add a temp variable to do the sequence properly.
You very quickly run into bignums. That can be fixed by substituting
a simple predicate in place of the nil. In any case, I've never seen
a shorter version of that sequence generator.

I'm not saying Lisp is easy. The real truth is that no programming
language is easy. Programming is a difficult task regardless of the
language you use. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be so much effort
expended on trying to write bug free software because everyone would
be doing it. Rational would not exist. There would be no RUP or
extreme programming schools of thought. 

-- 
One Emacs to rule them all.  One Emacs to find them,
One Emacs to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
Class B NRA Rifle Silhouette shooter
There are no typos in this post.  My spelling realy is that bad.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Computer Algebra Algorithms
    ... If you want to learn CAS, learn lisp because that is what the ... The parser could be written in C or any other language. ... I would consider that such a minor aspect of a programming ... generally prefer righting there numeric algorithms in Maple and MATLAB ...
    (sci.math.symbolic)
  • Why should I care about Lisp and Scheme?
    ... Foreword to the book "Essentials of Programming Languages". ... It's an imaginary conversation between a newbie and a hacker. ... Why should I care about Lisp and Scheme? ... language, the result would be a Lisp interpreter. ...
    (comp.lang.scheme)
  • Re: F#
    ... Why did they take Lisp? ... properties of the language are only a part of the picture. ... If the favored programming style of a certain language ... Knowing a success story only tells me that other people ...
    (comp.lang.functional)
  • Re: Opinions on intro lisp books
    ... But Lisp is a little different, ... Some languages support one style of programming better than they ... Even if that weren't the case, I'm not sure that a language being a ... I don't believe that learning to program in CL requires more theory ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • [ANN] 2nd European Lisp & Scheme Workshop
    ... Pascal Costanza, Programming Technology Lab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel ... Lisp has a tradition of providing a fruitful basis for language design ... and suggestions for breakout groups that discuss the opportunities Lisp ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)