Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Rainer Joswig <joswig@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:50:30 +0100
In article
<a4fa6a2d-2eed-4ea9-bb83-d8b27cfe703b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Xah Lee <xah@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2008-01-07
I just ran into a newsgroup post, where the redoubtable Richard J
Fateman (a well-known Mathematica hater) sullies Mathematica by
sputtering computer sciency obfuscation.
Here's the source of the message:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/163eb656becfcab6?dmode=source
You may want to read Richard's mail again and check what he is saying.
He is basically right.
Mathematica is a rule-based rewrite-system at its core.
That makes it substantially different from the evaluation
'rules' of (Common) Lisp.
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/03_ab.htm
or older:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node55.html#SECTION00900000000000000000
Compare that with
http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/book/section-2.6.1
http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/book/section-2.6.4
That's why I said in another posting that you need to understand
the evaluation / compilation model of Lisp.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Xah Lee
- Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- Prev by Date: Re: byte order
- Next by Date: Re: byte order
- Previous by thread: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- Next by thread: Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|