Good functional programming habbit?
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: Searching some references
Next: Comparing Lisp to Python, what you consider more important:speed or macros.
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Lindberg on 3 May 2010 07:19 Joerthan Panest <joerthan.panest(a)gmail.com> writes: > His kennyness <kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> Pascal Costanza wrote: >>> There is no primary programming style in Lisp. >> >> You need to write more Lisp. Some wise soul said Lisp gives us a >> million ways of doing something, and (1- a million) of them are wrong. > > That's funny. I heard it that (- a-million 1) were wrong. You need to write more Lisp. Bj�rn Lindberg
From: Pascal Costanza on 3 May 2010 08:10 On 03/05/2010 13:19, Bj�rn Lindberg wrote: > Joerthan Panest<joerthan.panest(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> His kennyness<kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Pascal Costanza wrote: >>>> There is no primary programming style in Lisp. >>> >>> You need to write more Lisp. Some wise soul said Lisp gives us a >>> million ways of doing something, and (1- a million) of them are wrong. >> >> That's funny. I heard it that (- a-million 1) were wrong. > > You need to write more Lisp. You need to write more Lisp. Pascal -- My website: http://p-cos.net Common Lisp Document Repository: http://cdr.eurolisp.org Closer to MOP & ContextL: http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/
From: Tamas K Papp on 3 May 2010 08:21 On Mon, 03 May 2010 14:10:04 +0200, Pascal Costanza wrote: > On 03/05/2010 13:19, Björn Lindberg wrote: >> Joerthan Panest<joerthan.panest(a)gmail.com> writes: >> >>> His kennyness<kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> Pascal Costanza wrote: >>>>> There is no primary programming style in Lisp. >>>> >>>> You need to write more Lisp. Some wise soul said Lisp gives us a >>>> million ways of doing something, and (1- a million) of them are >>>> wrong. >>> >>> That's funny. I heard it that (- a-million 1) were wrong. >> >> You need to write more Lisp. > > You need to write more Lisp. Writing more Lisp is always good for one's soul, regardless of this thread. Best, Tamas
From: Joerthan Panest on 3 May 2010 13:14 bjorn(a)runa.se (Björn Lindberg) writes: > Joerthan Panest <joerthan.panest(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> His kennyness <kentilton(a)gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Pascal Costanza wrote: >>>> There is no primary programming style in Lisp. >>> >>> You need to write more Lisp. Some wise soul said Lisp gives us a >>> million ways of doing something, and (1- a million) of them are wrong. >> >> That's funny. I heard it that (- a-million 1) were wrong. > > You need to write more Lisp. How much more and in what units?
From: Thomas A. Russ on 3 May 2010 12:09
Pascal Costanza <pc(a)p-cos.net> writes: > On 01/05/2010 05:18, His kennyness wrote: > > Pascal Costanza wrote: > >> There is no primary programming style in Lisp. > > > > You need to write more Lisp. Some wise soul said Lisp gives us a million > > ways of doing something, and (1- a million) of them are wrong. > > Oh, indeed: > > (1- a million) => > Error: 1- got 2 args, wanted 1 arg. > [condition type: PROGRAM-ERROR] > > (1- a million) is indeed wrong. > > I should have asked you first... You forgot to do (setq *dwim-mode* t) first. -- Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute |