What is the best way to process this list
in [Lisp]
|
From: Kaz Kylheku on 12 Jan 2010 14:52 On 2010-01-12, John Thingstad <jpthing(a)online.no> wrote: > The Mon, 11 Jan 2010 13:13:37 +0100, Nicolas Neuss wrote: > >>> >>> Lisp may be wonderful but beginner friendly it is not. >> >> Compared with what? >> > > Oddly I think is fine for a beginner. It is for seasoned programmes that > learning it is hard. Take Perl. You get the basic sed and awk syntax, you > get the C syntax and you get the command line programs like chmod. So if > you are a unix scripter learning Perl is easy. Even in Python if you are > familiar with the C library you get a basic working base of functions > 'for free'. > > Lisp is different. All names for common things are different. So > assosiative transfer works rather poorly. It doesn't help that it if very > difficult to find things in the hyperspec in you don't know where to look > or what the name is . I remember looking at list functions and not > finding what I needed because it was listed under sequence for example. > Similarly the coding teckniques are different than in C. Whereas in C, it's easy to find things in the library, by simply taking advantage of your Snobol background, which tells you that the initial sequence of characters which matches a class is called ``span'', and the point in a string where a character match occurs is ``break'', and that vowels are randomly dropped from function names in order to fit into a six character linker limitation. Hence: Thus strspn, strpbrk. And of course, you can find these in the permuted index of the free, online, hypertexified ISO C standard, under S and P. :)
From: mdj on 12 Jan 2010 18:11
On Jan 13, 12:01 am, Tamas K Papp <tkp...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:58:40 -0800, mdj wrote: > > On 12 Jan, 22:24, Nicolas Neuss <lastn...(a)math.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote: > > >> > Fair enough. I'm over the banal arguments that ensue from direct > >> > accusation so diffusing into observation seems more peaceful. > > >> Even more peaceful would be if you would then keep those > >> non-specifiable observations to yourself. > > > I give up. What exactly is your problem ? > > Maybe this: > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:43:20 -0800, mdj wrote: > > To me, the arrogance of the newcomers pales in comparison to the > > arrogance of some 'experts' - at least in the case of the newcomer we > > *know* it's born of ignorance. At times when I see a seasoned user > > accuse a newcomer of "braindamaged" thinking that's the result of using > > 'inferior' tools I'm forced to wonder whether those individuals really > > do *know* why Lisp is better at certain things or whether they > > themselves simply *believe* it. > > It is a serious accusation, but at the same time, it is diffuse so > people can't defend themselves. It is a sneaky thing to say things > like this, unless you can substantiate it. Fair enough. I thought it was obvious from the context the direction it was intended, but I nonetheless apologise if I offended anyone else. Matt |