Re: Really dumb LISP question.
- From: Tetrahedral Quartz <t.quartz@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 14:41:30 -0400
Nicolas Neuss wrote:
Tetrahedral Quartz <t.quartz@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
vippstar wrote:On Jul 20, 10:52 pm, Tetrahedral Quartz <t.qua...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Sorry, don't have them handy right now. symbol substitutions in the bodyccc31807 wrote:May we see them?Several years ago when I started Lisp, I hit a brick wall. I made noFunny, it took me less than two weeks to go from zero to significant
headway whatsoever. Since then, I have progressed to the point where I
am now writing Lisp scripts to do useful things. I'm no expert, but at
least I can write and read Lisp on a basic level.
mastery (including a couple of sophisticated macros).
code (think of something sort of like with-slots, only implemented
without benefit of symbol-macrolet -- won't handle name collisions
gracefully, but what the hey, it works for what I use it for) and one of
them transforms mathematical ASTs into numerical functions that do
certain sophisticated checks (and have certain sophisticated
optimizations) as part of the implementation of a symbolic-computation
DSL (itself part of a larger project).
No ordinary person has yet "significantly mastered" Common Lisp in two
I guess I'm not ordinary then. (I do have more than two decades' experience in IT, including with C, C++, Java, and other languages.)
Maybe a genius and expert could, but I'm sure that noone who
doesn't post to usenet under a real (and well-known) name can.
Apparently you'd be wrong about that.
A century-old building might still be maintained and inhabited, but it isWhat does it mean for software to be modern? Software is either3. Bite the bullet and learn emacs.Ugly and unnecessary since there are other, more modern development
environments for at least some Lisps.
maintained or not. Emacs is maintained.
not modern. You wouldn't need to be an architect to look at it and notice
that it is, say, a brownstone with Gothic gabling, arches, and gargoyles,
and not a glass tower reaching halfway to the sky. Nor to notice its lack
of a decent elevator, vs. the glass tower's whole bank of the things.
What concerns me, I prefer living in Buckingham palace to living in the
Sears tower. But, as they say, YMMV.
Why would you want that big drafty old place? It's structurally unsound, constantly in need of renovations, and one look at the wiring will make any self-respecting electrician go as white as a sheet. Plus the toilet's always backing up.
- Prev by Date: Re: Really dumb LISP question.
- Next by Date: Re: Really dumb LISP question.
- Previous by thread: Re: Really dumb LISP question.
- Next by thread: Re: Really dumb LISP question.