Now that Peter Siebel is getting close to releasing his book, I thought that I should speak up. Something, frankly, has been bothering me about Peter. It isn't his programming skills; those are clearly top-notch. It isn't even his writing skills; those are clearly up to the challenge of writing a book. In short, Peter seems like an intelligent, well-educated purveyer of the programming art. Indeed, the fact that he has shifted from an early Java disciple to a Lisp disciple is admirable.
> Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp
You see, Peter has not quite made the conversion to full Lisp master. He's holding on. Clearly, he's conflicted about it. He has a nice bit of Lisp advocacy in there at the end, but the "javamonkey.com" address shows he's not quite willing to fully commit.
Thus, my friends, I have taken the bold step of registering and parking "lispmonkey.com" for Peter. When he's ready to take the final plunge, I would urge Peter to contact me and we can finalize the domain transfer. I pray this will occur before his book goes to press such that any new Lisp disciples brought to the "one true faith" will not find their sensei in this state of half commitment. This is particularly true if Peter has decided to include any "You can contact the author at: *...@javamonkey.com," statements in his book.
Dave Roberts <ld...@droberts.com> writes: > Now that Peter Siebel is getting close to releasing his book, I > thought that I should speak up. Something, frankly, has been > bothering me about Peter. It isn't his programming skills; those are > clearly top-notch. It isn't even his writing skills; those are > clearly up to the challenge of writing a book. In short, Peter seems > like an intelligent, well-educated purveyer of the programming art. > Indeed, the fact that he has shifted from an early Java disciple to > a Lisp disciple is admirable.
> The problem, my friends, is his email signature:
>> Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp
> You see, Peter has not quite made the conversion to full Lisp > master. He's holding on. Clearly, he's conflicted about it. He has a > nice bit of Lisp advocacy in there at the end, but the > "javamonkey.com" address shows he's not quite willing to fully > commit.
Heh. I've been aware of that incongruity; I've just been too lazy to do anything about it. But that's is why the book is on gigamonkeys.com. I guess now is as good a time as any to make the switch. So, unless I've dorked up something in my Emacs config, this message should be from the new me.
> Thus, my friends, I have taken the bold step of registering and > parking "lispmonkey.com" for Peter. When he's ready to take the final > plunge, I would urge Peter to contact me and we can finalize the > domain transfer.
I'm touched. I actually considered registering lispmonkey.com some time ago but decided that it doesn't have quite the same ring to it--my javamonkey domain was always meant as a subtle dig at Java--even when I liked it, I realized it was for monkeys. I don't feel that way about Lisp.
> I pray this will occur before his book goes to press such that any > new Lisp disciples brought to the "one true faith" will not find > their sensei in this state of half commitment. This is particularly > true if Peter has decided to include any "You can contact the author > at: *...@javamonkey.com," statements in his book.
No, book stuff--and my main email now on, will be at gigamonkeys.com. As in, you can hire a billion monkeys, or you can hire me!
Peter Seibel <pe...@gigamonkeys.com> writes: > > Thus, my friends, I have taken the bold step of registering and > > parking "lispmonkey.com" for Peter. When he's ready to take the final > > plunge, I would urge Peter to contact me and we can finalize the > > domain transfer.
> I'm touched. I actually considered registering lispmonkey.com some > time ago but decided that it doesn't have quite the same ring to > it--my javamonkey domain was always meant as a subtle dig at > Java--even when I liked it, I realized it was for monkeys. I don't > feel that way about Lisp.
Doh! So are you telling me that I just shelled out a year's worth of domain registration for nothing? ;-)
> > I pray this will occur before his book goes to press such that any > > new Lisp disciples brought to the "one true faith" will not find > > their sensei in this state of half commitment. This is particularly > > true if Peter has decided to include any "You can contact the author > > at: *...@javamonkey.com," statements in his book.
> No, book stuff--and my main email now on, will be at gigamonkeys.com. > As in, you can hire a billion monkeys, or you can hire me!
Yea, but once you started using Lisp I would have figured it would increase your productivity. Do I now have to go and register "teramonkeys.com" for you...? ;-)
Dave Roberts <dave-rem...@remove-findinglisp.com> writes: > Peter Seibel <pe...@gigamonkeys.com> writes:
>> > Thus, my friends, I have taken the bold step of registering and >> > parking "lispmonkey.com" for Peter. When he's ready to take the final >> > plunge, I would urge Peter to contact me and we can finalize the >> > domain transfer.
>> I'm touched. I actually considered registering lispmonkey.com some >> time ago but decided that it doesn't have quite the same ring to >> it--my javamonkey domain was always meant as a subtle dig at >> Java--even when I liked it, I realized it was for monkeys. I don't >> feel that way about Lisp.
> Doh! So are you telling me that I just shelled out a year's worth of > domain registration for nothing? ;-)
Well, if you can't think of anything to do with it, I can take it off your hands. I've got plenty of other domains sitting around waiting for something to do. At the very least, I could set up javamonkey.com to redirect to lispmonkey.com. That'd be sort of funny, especially if I put up something on lispmonkey.com about how Lisp isn't for monkeys. ;-) (I'd have to get the tone just right; no need to be too rude to folks still trapped in the Java mines.)
Peter Seibel <pe...@gigamonkeys.com> writes: > for something to do. At the very least, I could set up javamonkey.com > to redirect to lispmonkey.com. That'd be sort of funny, especially if > I put up something on lispmonkey.com about how Lisp isn't for monkeys. > ;-) (I'd have to get the tone just right; no need to be too rude to > folks still trapped in the Java mines.)
The internet as an entity may appear to have a sheer unfallable memory, but it lacks the ingenuity of a human brain, which is more flexible and swift than any search-engine can predict, even if that could be cast in lisp, lisp would never allow itself to be casted.
Cor
-- To really make a mess of things one should use a computer
> You see, Peter has not quite made the conversion to full Lisp > master. He's holding on. Clearly, he's conflicted about it. He has a > nice bit of Lisp advocacy in there at the end, but the > "javamonkey.com" address shows he's not quite willing to fully > commit.
> No, book stuff--and my main email now on, will be at gigamonkeys.com. > As in, you can hire a billion monkeys, or you can hire me!
I would have thought that the difference between one monkey programming and one billion monkeys programming would show up only in the banana section of the budget...
Peter Seibel <pe...@gigamonkeys.com> writes: > for something to do. At the very least, I could set up javamonkey.com > to redirect to lispmonkey.com. That'd be sort of funny, especially if > I put up something on lispmonkey.com about how Lisp isn't for monkeys. > ;-) (I'd have to get the tone just right; no need to be too rude to > folks still trapped in the Java mines.)
You could have lispman. Java monkey vs lisp man. And then there is a bit of an evolution/devolution "joke". Man evolved from monkeys (with the exception of something like half of Kansas) but Java devolved from Lisp. I wish I could think of a good combination of lisp and homosapien. Lisapien does work nor does lispien or lispsapien...
dkixk wrote: > Peter Seibel <pe...@gigamonkeys.com> writes:
>>for something to do. At the very least, I could set up javamonkey.com >>to redirect to lispmonkey.com. That'd be sort of funny, especially if >>I put up something on lispmonkey.com about how Lisp isn't for
> monkeys.
>>;-) (I'd have to get the tone just right; no need to be too rude to >>folks still trapped in the Java mines.)
> You could have lispman. Java monkey vs lisp man. And then there is a > bit of an evolution/devolution "joke". Man evolved from monkeys...
Not.
You understand nothing. This is not a matter of evolution. McCarthy created Lisp, and He saw that it was Good. Game over.
On 25 Feb 2005 12:19:26 -0800, "dkixk" <dki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Man evolved from monkeys but Java devolved from Lisp.
The analogy is wrong.
Man evolved in parallel with monkeys from a common ancestor. AFAICT the only common ancestor of both Lisp and Java is assembler. It's the same as saying man and monkey evolved from a common amoeboid. Not superior joke material IMO.
Java looks more like a bastard child of C++ and Modula-3 than any relation to Lisp.
George Neuner <gneune...@comcast.net> writes: > On 25 Feb 2005 12:19:26 -0800, "dkixk" <dki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Man evolved from monkeys but Java devolved from Lisp.
> The analogy is wrong.
> Man evolved in parallel with monkeys from a common ancestor. AFAICT > the only common ancestor of both Lisp and Java is assembler. It's the > same as saying man and monkey evolved from a common amoeboid. Not > superior joke material IMO.
> Java looks more like a bastard child of C++ and Modula-3 than any > relation to Lisp.
JAVA has directly borrowed some things from Lisp and tried to stuff them into its rather different different kind of shoe. Most modern languages are painful in that way; Lisp's core feature is that the language is so extensible and so nebulous that it can evolve without betraying itself.
In general, Lisp is better able than other languages to steal all the good ideas from other languages. The popular modern versions of Lisp are certainly quite different from the original, mostly as a result of stealing from other languages (including FORTRAN, PL/I, Algol, Smalltalk, APL. and others) and working in and originating a lot of original innovation.
People often ask what "Lisp" is. One answer rarely given is: "Not much". Another answer is, "What would you like it to be?" Common Lisp is just one possible answer to that question: "A lot of compromises!"
>> Java looks more like a bastard child of C++ and Modula-3 than any >> relation to Lisp.
>JAVA has directly borrowed some things from Lisp
I know ... but it doesn't *look* like it does. I'm not referring to syntax, but rather to the visible functionality and patterns of writing code with it. Most of the borrowings from Lisp are well hidden.
