Re: Very poor Lisp performance

Jon Harrop wrote: 
...
However, LOC overly penalises Lisp and Scheme, IMHO. Specifically, Lisp and
Scheme programs are virtually unreadable unless the parentheses are
staggered by spreading expressions over several lines and using an
automatic indenter. So if I were to put a Lisp implementation of the ray
tracer on my site then I'd either state that, or I'd give results using
some other measure of verbosity, like characters.

i doubt lisp or scheme will gain anything there: the language defined words tend to be quite lengthy, and afaict that seems to encourage programmers to use pretty length identifiers for their own identifiers, so character count might penalize lisp even worse. otoh, the lengthy identifiers make lisp code quite easy to read and understand.

token count probably would be better

... 

hs
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Vote on R6RS, if you have the time to write a 150-word essay
    ... the portability of Scheme programs. ... statically analyzable entity whose primary ... With Common Lisp and Scheme both turning away ... terms of lispy language implementation. ...
    (comp.lang.scheme)
  • Re: Very poor Lisp performance
    ... > JH>> However, LOC overly penalises Lisp and Scheme, IMHO. ... > JH>> Scheme programs are virtually unreadable unless the parentheses are ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Very poor Lisp performance
    ... > JH>> However, LOC overly penalises Lisp and Scheme, IMHO. ... > JH>> Scheme programs are virtually unreadable unless the parentheses are ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Very poor Lisp performance
    ... JH>> However, LOC overly penalises Lisp and Scheme, IMHO. ... JH>> Scheme programs are virtually unreadable unless the parentheses are ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)