From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 24 Apr 2010 05:10 Jorge Gajon <gajon(a)gajon.org> writes: > On 2010-04-22, Peter Keller <psilord(a)merlin.cs.wisc.edu> wrote: >> I am a staunch vim user, to say the least. However, after patches I >> was giving back to various lisp projects were rejected with the reason >> "format it in SLIME or else". I bit the bullet and simply learned emacs >> for my Lisp IDE. I'm happy I did this. >> > > Hi Peter, > > I'm an avid Vim user as well, and I've been using "Limp" with a few > modifications�. I've been playing a little bit with Emacs and SLIME, and > I can clearly see that the Emacs platform is much more powerful and that > there's nothing like SLIME available to VIM. > > However, I've been hesitant to completely immerse myself into Emacs > mainly because I'm afraid that I will spend endless hours learning and > customizing it, without gaining a significant advantage over Vim. You could. But you wouldn't have to, to benefit from emacs lisp. Really, I usually don't spend any time on emacs customization, in the course of a project. On the other hand, I may spend a few minutes to write project specific emacs lisp functions, to help editing or generating project specific stuff. And you can customize emacs a lot without even programming in emacs lisp. There are almost orthogonal matters. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__
From: Frank Buss on 24 Apr 2010 05:47 Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote: > Yes. After all, we all know that the only thing Python has is > significant indentation and colons (both of which are despicable), and > nothing else, not even list processing primitives. Python has some list processing primitives: (car x) = x[0] (cdr x) = x[1:] (cons x y) = [x] + y etc. Of course, the functions are not the same as in Common Lisp, e.g. x[0] gives an IndexError, if the list is empty and the primitives are not functions, so you need to define your own functions for using it with higher order functions. -- Frank Buss, fb(a)frank-buss.de http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de
From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 24 Apr 2010 08:03 Frank Buss <fb(a)frank-buss.de> writes: > Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote: > >> Yes. After all, we all know that the only thing Python has is >> significant indentation and colons (both of which are despicable), and >> nothing else, not even list processing primitives. > > Python has some list processing primitives: Yes. And lisp has arrays. That was my point ;-) We could develop the memes that python is PainfullY THpace Overloaded Nuttiness ruby is Rabid UBject Yoke java is Just Another Vaunted Avoidance etc. (The TH in python is for the x[0],x[1:] you mentioned). -- __Pascal Bourguignon__
From: Peter Keller on 24 Apr 2010 11:36 Pascal J. Bourguignon <pjb(a)informatimago.com> wrote: > We could develop the memes that > java is Just Another Vaunted Avoidance Just Another Vapid Attempt -pete
From: Nicolas Neuss on 24 Apr 2010 12:37
Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> writes: > Then you are probably not typical. BTW, do you have online notes for > your course? I am just curious. I have notes for a previous version of the course which was a 2h/week lecture. It mostly follows the first three chapters of SICP with add-ons on syntax transformations, the lambda calculus, and OO. The notes are in German, but not under a published link. If you want to take a look, drop me an email. > If I had the resources, would love to conduct the following survey: > among undergrads exposed to some form Lisp, what fraction knows that > > - Lisp has strings? > - ... and arrays? > - ... and macros? > - there are editors/IDEs that make working with Lisp extremely easy? > - Common Lisp exists? I guess that my students (from the previous course) would answer "yes" to those questions. > - ... and has a lot of library function for List Manipulation 101? > - ... has loop and iterate? > - (tail) recursion doesn't come up very often for the average CL'er? For these questions, their answer would be "no", because I used DrScheme and the focus was not on CL. > - CLOS exists? > - CLOS is far more advanced than the OO framework of some languages > that position themselves as object-oriented? > - that MOP exists (no need to know the details or use it, just what it > is)? "Yes" for those questions. Nicolas |