On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Mike Meyer <
[email protected]> wrote:
> You might also note that lisp behaves the same way as python - at least
> outside of macros. As noted in the last paragraph, the paper isn't about
> lisp vs other languages, its about readability vs "power as terseness".
> The examples just happened to pick on a feature heavily associated with
lisp.

Agreed.  I'm not defending Common LISP - I've never used it and don't plan
to.  But Clojure is also a LISP.   Comparisons to Clojure are more relevant
to me (and this mailing list).

I was responding to your remark that LISP "is held up as an example of how
badly wrong allowing anyone to create statements can go."  I think the paper
actually demonstrates that allowing that *in a mutable language* can go
badly wrong.   I think the paper implicitly (and perhaps unintentionally)
makes an argument against hidden side effects in general.  If you care about
readability you should appreciate a language restricts mutability - call it
'the functional(ish) way'.

Steve





> "Steve Molitor" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> The Python approach leads to more readable
> >>code: http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/papers/readability.html
> >
> >The two cases he sites do not apply to Clojure:
>
> More accurately, the problem being analyzed (a variable changing to a bad
> value) can't happen in clojure. It has to have been bound with a bad value.
>
> >The first case is a function that is allowed to change the value of a
> >variable passed into it.  Variables are immutable in Clojure so you can't
> >write the dangerous 'inc' function he describes.  You can't change the
> value
> >of a variable passed to a function in Python either, but you can pass a
> >mutable object to a function and have the function modify the object,
> which
> >is close to the same thing.  Clojure is much more readable than Python in
> >this regard.
>
> You might also note that lisp behaves the same way as python - at least
> outside of macros. As noted in the last paragraph, the paper isn't about
> lisp vs other languages, its about readability vs "power as terseness". The
> examples just happened to pick on a feature heavily associated with lisp.
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<clojure%[email protected]>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en

Reply via email to