Re: Why don't people like lisp?

Discussion in 'Python' started by mike420@ziplip.com, Oct 25, 2003.

  1. Guest

    Kaz Kylheku wrote:

    > "Andrew Dalke" <> wrote in message
    > news:<64Ilb.1525$>...
    >
    >>
    >> Did you look at my example doing just that? I built
    >> an AST for Python and converted it into a normal function.



    Andrew,

    If you are talking about your stack-based language, you had something
    like

    "5 3 + b *"

    Now, can you replace "3" with a Python expression, like
    "5 ( 3 + input() ) + b *" ? I don't think so. You'd have to change your
    whole parser at least, and even after that I'm not sure if you could do
    this.

    IIRC, in Erann's Lisp version, you can. You can just write
    `(5 ,(+ 3 read) + b *) instead of '(5 3 + b *) . That's what we mean
    by mixing different languages in one.


    > I'm looking for a Python example which adds a new kind of statement to
    > the language, and then later in the source file uses that statement to
    > write a part of the program, such that it's all processed in the same
    > pass.


    Did they already give an example like this without the "same source
    file" requirement? ...

    > The statement can be nested in existing ones, and can have
    > existing syntax embedded in it. Oh yeah, and it should work on at
    > least two Python implementations.


    ... in just the official CPython? I'm sorry, I must have missed it.

    420

    P.S. This is a very silly thread subject (but I'll keep it).
    We all know *why* people do not like Lisp. It's the parens!
    But don't take my word for it: I like Lisp. Ask almost anyone who doesn't!
     
    , Oct 25, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. wrote in
    news::

    > Kaz Kylheku wrote:
    >
    >> "Andrew Dalke" <> wrote in message
    >> news:<64Ilb.1525$>...
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Did you look at my example doing just that? I built
    >>> an AST for Python and converted it into a normal function.

    >
    >
    > Andrew,
    >
    > If you are talking about your stack-based language, you had something
    > like
    >
    > "5 3 + b *"
    >
    > Now, can you replace "3" with a Python expression, like
    > "5 ( 3 + input() ) + b *" ? I don't think so. You'd have to change
    > your whole parser at least, and even after that I'm not sure if you
    > could do this.


    Well, changing specs etc., however the above is probably not
    understandable to the poor domain engineer -- who finally had gotten a
    handle on the domain language and now suddenly he is seeing parenthesis
    and infix expressions...? Going through the tutorial and reference
    manual that came with the stack based language, he still can't figure it
    out, so he calls your tech support, it's escalated, and the next day
    it's dropped in your lap (and if you have a sensible manager) with
    instructions to rip out your abomination.

    > IIRC, in Erann's Lisp version, you can. You can just write
    > `(5 ,(+ 3 read) + b *) instead of '(5 3 + b *) . That's what we mean
    > by mixing different languages in one.


    You could try suggesting only to ship him a copy of the Lisp manuals?

    The intertwined html/lisp example was laughable. What company would let
    a programmer/engineer deal with trivialitites like changing style
    guides, color schemes etc., which quite frankly they know nothing about
    since they're not visual desingers? This is why the plethora of
    templating systems exist -- and are the right tool for the job.

    >> I'm looking for a Python example which adds a new kind of statement
    >> to the language, and then later in the source file uses that
    >> statement to write a part of the program, such that it's all
    >> processed in the same pass.

    [..]
    >> The statement can be nested in existing ones, and can have
    >> existing syntax embedded in it.

    [..]

    Translation: Whaaa! I want macros <wink>.

    > P.S. This is a very silly thread subject (but I'll keep it).
    > We all know *why* people do not like Lisp. It's the parens!
    > But don't take my word for it: I like Lisp. Ask almost anyone who
    > doesn't!


    Personally, I don't care about the parens, the 28 different ways of
    quoting things _is_ a cognitive burden -- and where are the first class
    continuations?

    -- bjorn
     
    Bjorn Pettersen, Oct 25, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Bjorn Pettersen" <> wrote

    > The intertwined html/lisp example was laughable. What company would let
    > a programmer/engineer deal with trivialitites like changing style
    > guides, color schemes etc., which quite frankly they know nothing about
    > since they're not visual desingers? This is why the plethora of
    > templating systems exist -- and are the right tool for the job.


    If plethora of templating systems exist, this only proves that it's the best
    system on average for average programmers on average cases. Now try to do a
    really complex web application (that is not some kind of eCommerce one but
    one with hundreds of classes with different views according to the
    habilitation levels, and objects status) and then you need an above average
    systems or the development time explodes.
    The designers' HTML is obviously always automatically converted to the
    equivalent Lisp code.

    [Hum, sorry for being harsh but these kind of endless threads (a
    comp.lang.lisp specialty) get on my nerves. And now I'm even increasing the
    noise by posting to one of these. And yes I know, if I don't like them I
    don't have to read them. I don't, I just do some random sampling... :(]

    Marc
     
    Marc Battyani, Oct 25, 2003
    #3
  4. "Marc Battyani" <> wrote in
    news:bnesv2$:

    > "Bjorn Pettersen" <> wrote
    >
    >> The intertwined html/lisp example was laughable. What company would
    >> let a programmer/engineer deal with trivialitites like changing style
    >> guides, color schemes etc., which quite frankly they know nothing
    >> about since they're not visual desingers? This is why the plethora of
    >> templating systems exist -- and are the right tool for the job.

    >
    > If plethora of templating systems exist, this only proves that it's
    > the best system on average for average programmers on average cases.


    No. Their abundance doesn't prove anything. It does perhaps indicate
    that they're useful.

    > Now try to do a really complex web application (that is not some kind
    > of eCommerce one but one with hundreds of classes with different views
    > according to the habilitation levels, and objects status) and then you
    > need an above average systems or the development time explodes.


    AFAIK, this is true for any 'really complex' problem in any problem
    domain (and I can surely redefine 'really complex' to make it so no
    matter what you're currently using <wink>). The _overwhelming_ number of
    web projects are either trivially simple wrt user-interface, and even
    complex projects normally have simple UIs. If 'really complex' projects
    account for e.g. less than .5%, at least _I_ wouldn't feel comfortable
    saying that the html macros presented earlier will always provide a good
    solution -- and if not always, I'll have to write something new, further
    reducing the usability range...

    > The designers' HTML is obviously always automatically converted to the
    > equivalent Lisp code.


    Hmm.. does the developer test the conversion + his additions on all
    browsers/platforms, or is it converted back to html for the visual
    designer to verify? How can you guarantee an exact roundtrip without
    implementing a template system? (think: someone added stuff -- let's say
    in the domain specific language you created for them -- to your Lisp
    program and re-indented to make it look better in their eyes, more like
    C... still works the same doesn't it? ;-)

    > [Hum, sorry for being harsh but these kind of endless threads (a
    > comp.lang.lisp specialty) get on my nerves. And now I'm even
    > increasing the noise by posting to one of these. And yes I know, if I
    > don't like them I don't have to read them. I don't, I just do some
    > random sampling... :(]


    I should perhaps have removed c.l.py...

    -- bjorn
     
    Bjorn Pettersen, Oct 26, 2003
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    400
    Greg Menke
    Oct 19, 2003
  2. Andrew Dalke

    Re: Why don't people like lisp?

    Andrew Dalke, Oct 22, 2003, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    35
    Views:
    1,016
  3. Replies:
    16
    Views:
    487
    Kaz Kylheku
    Oct 28, 2003
  4. Mr. SweatyFinger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,076
    Smokey Grindel
    Dec 2, 2006
  5. SAZ
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    337
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    May 6, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page