Re: C++ sucks for games

From: Svein Ove Aas (svein.ove_at_aas.no)
Date: 10/28/04 

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:21:46 +0200

Alex Drummond wrote:

>> No, it was the implementation of all those darned ()'s and spaces.
>> I like the more natural way than that used in Lisp - that's all.
>> It had nothing to do with Complex.
>
> Brackets: Lisp function calls have exactly the same number of brackets as
> C function calls, the only difference is that the function name is inside
> the brackets. You only have "extra" brackets in cases where C provides an
> infix operator for a particular operation (e.g. addition). Unless you're
> doing lots of arithmetic, Lisp syntax is just as natural as C syntax
> regarding brackets.
>
Actually, I've found that building up complex arithmetic expressions is
easier in Lisp than with normal arithmetic notation, because I can
immediately see the tree-structure involved.

This isn't always true, of course.
 

Relevant Pages

  • Re: C++ sucks for games
    ... All we could seem to do is have lots of brackets with calls to functions ... objective advantages of Lisp syntax: ... connectives are sandwiched between the constituents; ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: C++ sucks for games
    ... All we could seem to do is have lots of brackets with calls to functions ... objective advantages of Lisp syntax: ... connectives are sandwiched between the constituents; ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: C++ sucks for games
    ... All we could seem to do is have lots of brackets with calls ... This was just an example regarding infix operators. ... Then it would look more common: ... >> That everything in Lisp uses the prefix notation can also make it ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: C++ sucks for games
    ... All we could seem to do is have lots of brackets with calls ... This was just an example regarding infix operators. ... Then it would look more common: ... >> That everything in Lisp uses the prefix notation can also make it ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: C++ sucks for games
    ... > I'll stress one last time - IMHO, the reason your not getting any converts ... > to Lisp from this thread is that those three lines look very complex to a ... it is tricky to keep count of the brackets. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)