Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 23:18:44 +0100
Joe Marshall wrote:
> Is readability simply a subjective measure, then? If so, and if
> maintainability is about how easily a human can parse it, then
> maintainability is also a subjective measure (and not particularly
> interesting for comparing computer languages).
Yes. Readability and maintainability are inherently subjective. However,
they are both very important when comparing computer languages.
For example, nobody in their right mind would consider writing production
code in Whitespace or Brainf*** because they are clearly less readable and
maintainable, even though it is subjective. That is a clear-cut case, but
with Lisp vs ML it is not so simple, IMHO.
> It seems likely to me that languages that require complex parsers are
> harder for humans to understand as well.
There is unquestionably a huge amount of evidence to the contrary. Most
natural and programming languages have complicated grammars precisely
because it simplifies their use and makes them easier to understand.
Additionally (pun intended), we were all taught operator precedences in
conventional mathematics at a very young age. It seems at best odd and at
worst stupid to disregard this.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: André Thieme
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Rob Thorpe
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Joe Marshall
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Förster vom Silberwald
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Hartmann Schaffer
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Tayssir John Gabbour
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Pascal Bourguignon
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- References:
- Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: M Jared Finder
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Raffael Cavallaro
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Svenne Krap
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Ulrich Hobelmann
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Förster vom Silberwald
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Michael Sullivan
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Hartmann Schaffer
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jamie Border
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Christophe Rhodes
- Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- From: Joe Marshall
- Very poor Lisp performance
- Prev by Date: Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- Next by Date: Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- Previous by thread: Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- Next by thread: Re: Very poor Lisp performance
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|