LISP - The Spirit of Lisp - Transparency!
ilias
the people around lisp design. they design and design and design.
-
there is a trap.
once you start to design a lisp interpreter, you'll recognise that you
fall into this trap.
do, try design, talk, try, talk make.
-
i escaped from this trap, early.
i've continued my waste-of-time-project in C++ Builder. Having some of
the information about LISP in background i understand some more things.
Lisp has solutions for may things. But has to many deficit
The way?
-
Smalltalk.
Without knowing much about it.
Knowing only that its similar to lisp due to its architecture (image
based, realtime modifications) but strongly objectoriented.
Thats the way.
The Entry point.
-
But maybe i'm wrong.
The only thing i know for sure:
*Common* LISP is not the way.
-
*Common* LISP is an example for the failure of human being.
-
*Scheme* is an example for the failure of human being.
-
I could spit into your faces.
Respectless savages.
Ruined this genious invention.
-
of course i'll be back.
cannot await to blame you.
when i've the *facts* to do.
-
and i *will* blame you.
and i will *explain* it...
with 'apples'.
be sure!
nearly *everyone* will understand.
what you have done.
to the little baby.
lisp.
-
...
-
The Spirit of Lisp - Transparency!
Andreas Wild
>
> and i will *explain* it...
>
> with 'apples'.
>
> be sure!
>
> nearly *everyone* will understand.
>
> what you have done.
>
> to the little baby.
>
> lisp.
>
> -
>
> ...
>
> -
>
> The Spirit of Lisp - Transparency!
>
*If* I would have searched a posting like that I'm sure that I'd looked
for a newsgroup called
*comp.lang.poetry* or
*comp.opensource.lyrics*.
The imagination of going down on my knees in front of a beloved person
with some pretty flowers (still) in my hands and recitating the above
text makes me feeling very romantic.
Andi
ilias
poor soul.
Blair McGlashan
news:anv1jo$f18$1...@usenet.otenet.gr...
>....
> and i *will* blame you.
>
> and i will *explain* it...
>
> with 'apples'.
>
> be sure!
>
> nearly *everyone* will understand.
>
> what you have done.
>
> to the little baby.
>
> lisp.
Hmmm, maybe I'm wrong. Its not Eliza. Its an attempt at the monkeys with
typewriters and Shakespeare problem. Not a bad one, but very irritating.
Regards
Blair
David Rush
ilias <at_...@pontos.net> writes:
> Lisp has solutions for may things. But has to many deficit
If you'd spend a year actually writing code in some Lisp variant, I
imagine that you'd feel differently.
> The way? ... Smalltalk.
Well, yeah. For a lot of things. Been there, done that, tie-dyed the
T-shirt.
> Without knowing much about it.
So what else is new?
> Knowing only that its similar to lisp due to its architecture (image
> based, realtime modifications) but strongly objectoriented.
You missed this boat before you even *thought* about getting in the
car and driving down to the dock...
david rush
--
As I've gained more experience with Perl it strikes me that it resembles
Lisp in many ways, albeit Lisp as channeled by an awk script on acid.
-- Tim Moore (on comp.lang.lisp)
Raymond Wiker
Which proves that just a single monkey with a typewriter is
not enough, even if the typewriter is actually a computer.
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: Raymon...@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
Faried Nawaz
> i escaped from this trap, early.
So long. I'd say it's been nice knowing you, but, really, it hasn't.
Faried.
--
The Great GNU has arrived, infidels, behold his wrath !
If I wanted a GF, Values, not variables.
I'd use CL.
Justin Johnson
This smacks to me of trying to learn a language and then thinking that
'grass is greener on the other side...'
I like LISP. I like Smalltalk. I like most languages. I especially like
languages like LISP and Smalltalk because they have pure design principles
at the lowest level (Smalltalk - everything objects, LISP - Program and data
are the same/S-Expressions).
When languages are bolstered to become useful in a commercial/industrial
sense, they become bigger and in some ways perhaps feel less simple. This
is not necessarily a bad thing. IMHO, Common LISP is still pure at heart.
Perhaps you find Common LISP overwhelming? Nobody is forcing you to use it.
> and i will *explain* it...
>
> with 'apples'.
And I'm sure you'll be answered with 'oranges'.
--
Justin Johnson
"ilias" <at_...@pontos.net> wrote in message
news:anv1jo$f18$1...@usenet.otenet.gr...