What is the best way to process this list
in [Lisp]
|
From: mdj on 9 Jan 2010 11:07 On Jan 9, 7:19 pm, Madhu <enom...(a)meer.net> wrote: [snip] Please refrain from suggesting I am mentally infirm.
From: Pillsy on 9 Jan 2010 11:25 On Jan 9, 6:04 am, Madhu <enom...(a)meer.net> wrote: [...] > Pascal Costanza, and members on the ELS board such as Weinreb have > vested interests and may express dishonest opinions for specific gain. Also, they're Reptoids. Sheesh, Pillsy
From: Madhu on 9 Jan 2010 21:33 * Pillsy <760644d9-f1ba-4c8f-871c-4c1beb0b3905(a)w12g2000vbj.googlegroups.com> : Wrote on Sat, 9 Jan 2010 08:25:51 -0800 (PST): | On Jan 9, 6:04 am, Madhu <enom...(a)meer.net> wrote: | [...] |> Pascal Costanza, and members on the ELS board such as Weinreb have |> vested interests and may express dishonest opinions for specific gain. | | Also, they're Reptoids. | | Sheesh, Please don't dismiss this as some reptilian nutcase conspiracy theory, but keep your mind open to the possibility of what I've stated, so you can detect it if and when it happens, and please respond responsibly and appropriately to it, for everyone's benefit. I hope the rest of the post that you responded to stands on evidence that is immediately perceivable. -- Madhu
From: Nick Keighley on 11 Jan 2010 06:14 On 8 Jan, 12:12, Nicolas Neuss <lastn...(a)math.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote: > Ron Garret <rNOSPA...(a)flownet.com> writes: > > This is not really Peter's fault, by the way. Lisp pedagogy is > > hobbled by the fact that Common Lisp has built-in support for > > particular implementations of associative maps, but not for abstract > > associative maps. This, BTW, is consistent with another point of view > > that has a significant constituency within the Lisp community, to wit, > > that CL is a language for experts and the fact that it does not cater > > to beginners is a feature, not a bug. I deserve to be flamed but... Speaking as someone who is thinking about learning Lisp... > I would be interested in who is claiming such a thing. Quite the > opposite, I think that most of us think > > 1. CL is a language for everyone with good taste. > > 2. It does cater to beginners at least as much as the very popular > languages C or Java, the sheer size of Lisp looks scarey. Though I'm not sure how much of a monster Java has become. > and surely much more than C++. agreed C++ is pretty nasty. Though "Accelerated C++" has an interesting approach as it goes "middle out". It does containers before arrays. Pointer arithmatic and arrays are regarded as advanced techniques. The full horror of templates is avoided pretty much entirely (ie. you're taught to be a template *user* rather than a template implementor). > (Also the > difference in accessibility to Scheme or Python is not large, IMO.) having learnt both of those... Good beginners books seem to be thin on the ground for Common Lisp. This may not actually be true but finding scheme and python starter books is much easier. > 3. Where it does not, there are either important reasons, or you can > easily adapt it to your needs. Lisp may be wonderful but beginner friendly it is not. But maybe I lack taste. -- Nick Keighley
From: Pascal Costanza on 11 Jan 2010 07:02
On 11/01/2010 12:14, Nick Keighley wrote: >> (Also the >> difference in accessibility to Scheme or Python is not large, IMO.) > > having learnt both of those... Good beginners books seem to be thin on > the ground for Common Lisp. This may not actually be true but finding > scheme and python starter books is much easier. We live in a world where quantity and quality is typically assumed to be the same. But that's actually not true. You don't need lots of books, the only thing you need is good books. When you enter "Common Lisp" in amazon.com, for example, the first entry is a book with almost 5 stars, alongside a couple more books with equally high ratings. I find that easy enough. 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/ |