Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- From: Pascal Costanza <pc@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 08:52:33 +0200
JesusWaffle@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I mostly agree with your assessment. But note that a functional
programming style is somewhat more convenient with a Lisp-1. It's easier
to express things like (((f x) y) z) whereas in a Lisp-2 you would have
to say (funcall (funcall (f x) y) z). So if you have a strong preference
for functional programming (or would like to explore it more deeply) you
might want to try out a Lisp-1 (i.e., Scheme).
How about using a simple read-macro for this? Something along the lines
of:
(defun square-brace-reader (stream char)
(declare (ignore char))
`(funcall ,@(read-delimited-list #\] stream t)))
(set-macro-character #\[ #'square-brace-reader)
That will expand [foo bar] to (funcall foo bar), or [[(f x) y] z] to
(funcall (funcall (f x) y) z).
....because you still have the cognitive overhead of having to know when or when not to use brackets (which may or may not be relevant to you).
Pascal
--
3rd European Lisp Workshop
July 3 - Nantes, France - co-located with ECOOP 2006
http://lisp-ecoop06.bknr.net/
.
- References:
- Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- From: JesusWaffle
- Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- From: Pascal Costanza
- Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- From: JesusWaffle
- Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- Prev by Date: Re: organizing lisp code
- Next by Date: Re: Just can't hear enough about Cells?
- Previous by thread: Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- Next by thread: Re: Relative merits of Lisp-1 vs. Lisp-2?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
