On 12/19/2010 7:31 PM, Vagif Verdi wrote:
Haskell has aha moments too. And it is not lisp. The definition of "lisp" i accept is much simpler and much more obvious: source code of the program is a valid data structure in that language.
I agree that you can't BE a lisp without homoiconicity. However, I was struggling with Clojure because it lacks nil-punning which I consider fundamental. I have self-debated a lot of the choices that Rich made. Now that I'm in "thirst for the language" mode I understand that nil-punning conflicts with lazy so I can accept the choice. Haskell has neat ideas but I've seen them before in lisp-based systems. I work in a language which is strongly typed, allows currying, is functional, etc., implemented in Common Lisp. I have not found the "ah-hah!" in Haskell. In fact, until the "ah-hah!" moment occurred I didn't know that it was my working definition of Lisp. Tim Daly "Your enlightment may vary" :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
