Labels

[Malcolm McLean]

I can see that Lisp can't win. If it has special forms for convenience
(like conditional execution for example) than it's cluttered up with
special cases. If it's stripped back and totally uniform, you'd be
complaining that it's impossible to use -- try writing a conditional
where the form (if test then-form else-form) has uniform evaluation
semantics. Indeed, this was your initial complaint.

What you want is a language which has completely uniform, minimal syntax
the allows you to build arbitrary functions with a simple interpreter,
then permits higher-level constructs on top which the user actually calls.

So few people write their own vsprintf in C. But it can be done if
needed.

Lisp is almost that language. But not quite. You find that the ' can't be
implemented in terms of Lips expressions which construct lists taking
"quote", you need a special patch so that the interpreter throws out
(lambda fredsarguments (+(* x y) z)) (I didn't know that when I was writing
the interpreter, I just didn't know how it was meant to deal with that
situation, which appeared legitimate, but won't fit into the parse scheme).

I'm not anti-Lisp, however. I've got a long term project to add the lisp
interpreter to a parallel graphical language, but it's on the back burner
for now, I want to concentrate on Baby X. The comments were facetious because
of airs of superiority put on by certain posters (not you) due to their
knowledge of lambda calculus. I've only got a rough understanding of it,
I wouldn't pretend any more.

 

[BartC]

I'm not anti-Lisp, however. I've got a long term project to add the lisp
interpreter to a parallel graphical language, but it's on the back burner
for now, I want to concentrate on Baby X.

You might be better off with another language, as Lisp will put people off.
Maybe your own mini-Basic. Or Lua.

If the users are not going to be expert programmers, then you want something
that makes things appear simpler than they are. Not a magnitude more
difficult!

 

[Malcolm McLean]

You might be better off with another language, as Lisp will put people off
Maybe your own mini-Basic. Or Lua.

If the users are not going to be expert programmers, then you want something
that makes things appear simpler than they are. Not a magnitude more
difficult!

It's a parallel language, so the nodes will have to pass data between
teach other. Lisp has the advantage that the format is natural, you just
pass lists (S-expressions or whatever they are called). You convert them
to ascii when they need to go over serial interfaces, using a protocol
the everyone understands.
It's also got the advantage that the interpreter is easy to write. Not as
easy as it seems at first, as I found out, but still a lot easier than
or any other recognised language.

But yes, either MiniBasic or Lua are possibly better bets. People don't like
writing Lisp, despite what Ben says. That's why the language hasn't caught
on. In computer theory terms its extremely powerful and elegant, and it's
also older than C and maybe even older than Fortran. But the number of people
using it is low. At Leeds there was one book on Lisp in the entire library.

 

[Ben Bacarisse]

<snip>

I was all set to let the thread wither away, but the you say:

[...] People don't like
writing Lisp, despite what Ben says.

I've made no remark about whether "people" like to write Lisp. Don't
make up stuff about what I think or say.

[...] At Leeds there was one book on Lisp in the entire library.

A quick look at the online catalogue suggests they have seen the error
of their ways and have bought some more.

 

[Malcolm McLean]

I was all set to let the thread wither away, but the you say:

[...] People don't like writing Lisp, despite what Ben says.

I've made no remark about whether "people" like to write Lisp. Don't
make up stuff about what I think or say.

You were claiming that undergraduates found it simpler than other languages.
Despite that, I maintain that people don't like writing it. There's no
implication that you literally uttered the words "people like writing Lisp",
only that you said things that could lead a reasonable person to that
conclusion.

[...] At Leeds there was one book on Lisp in the entire library.

A quick look at the online catalogue suggests they have seen the error
of their ways and have bought some more.

I checked, and a lot of them are on stacks, so I suppose technically
in the library, but in a sort of book graveyard for material few people are
likely to consult. Others may have been out on loan. A few of the other hits
would be shelved with "natural language processing" and suchlike rather than
"language primers".
I was shocked and rather disappointed to find that there was almost nothing
on Lisp, despite the university maintaining a reasonably well-regarded
computer science department. Some of the books might be new because I recently
spotted a job advert that mentioned Lisp.