Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Jean Guillaume Pyraksos <wissme@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 08:37:32 +0100
The discussion is interesting, don't blame neither Xah L. nor Richard F. for their extreme
opinions. Mathematica is *interesting* for the Lisp community, it is perhaps - for now - the
most advanced Lisp-like language. I can understand the opinion that a rewrite system is
*perceived* from the programmer's point of vue as a macro expansion, even if it is
not actually...
The best thing which could happen is that the core language of Mathematica, without
math librairies, is placed in the public domain. This idea was in the air some years
ago, don't remember exactly, but was abandonned by Wolfram Research. They missed
a point, this language could have been a killer, when augmented with general capabilities
such as network or GUI programming. Steven, come on, give us your baby ! You will make
money with the maths...
Or at least show us a meta circular Mathematica interpreter :-)
-JG
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Jon Harrop
- Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- References:
- Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Xah Lee
- Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Rainer Joswig
- Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Xah Lee
- Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- From: Rainer Joswig
- Re: 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: Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- Next by thread: Re: Lisp and Scheme with fewer parentheses / Mathematica??
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|