[rescue] Re: lisp
Mario A. Graziosi
lordzorcon at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 21 14:45:51 CDT 2002
All this talk of lisp, and no one mentions Guy steele?
the end-all of lisp references.
> On June 21, Joshua D Boyd wrote:
> > > ...and you may name a hundred systems. Maybe even five
> > > Compare that to the number of packages written in, say,
> > > C...FORTRAN...C++...hmm? ;) *poke*
> > Just because a language doesn't have popular support doesn't mean it
> > is bad. Just like having popular support doesn't mean it is good
> > (ahem, VB). In the case of Lisp, I feel that it's problem is people
> > who don't use the proper editor (if you learn the commands, emacs
> > makes dealing with the parens quite simple), and/or think of it as
> > just an AI language, thanks to those stupid 70s and 80s wanks.
> HEY hey hey...I never said it was *bad*, man...
> > OK. First, I recommend Scheme over Lisp. I think it gets the point
> > across a lot faster than lisp does, and I think it is pretty easy to
> > switch back and forth, and the best thing I've found for learning
> > either is for scheme.
> What are the differences? I know they're related in some way but
> I'm not sure how. Is it easy to summarize?
More information about the rescue