I think it's a mistake to discount the importance of syntax to a language. Human beings, as a species is heavily symbolic. Think of ancient cave paintings, to pictograms, to scripts. We use these symbols to communicate with each other, our outside world, and our abstract thoughts. Whether it's written / spoken language, or math or music notation, we need these symbols - it's a human thing. Dolphins or monkeys, while very intelligent, do not, by themselves, use these written symbols to communicate with each other.
And I think it follows then, that the design of the syntax itself is important. It's certainly true that abstract concepts (of computation in this case) are the motive for using any given syntax. But the syntax impacts and facilitates the kinds of ideas we can have, the ease with which we can communicate them with each other, and so on. Anyways, my two cents. Tim Washington Interruptsoftware.ca / Bkeeping.com -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
