On Mar 12, 2006, at 6:19 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 16:07:21 -0700, "Levi Pearson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
If you read through that, you'll see that [Lisp] includes two
kinds of
expressions, s-expressions (which are fully-parenthesized, and the
native data format) and m-expressions that use brackets and a more
math-like notation (with the operator on the outside of the
brackets). In the years that followed, programmers rejected the m-
expressions in favor of the s-expressions that make up today's
Lisps. Hmm, maybe there's some value to the 'weird' syntax after
all, eh?
John McCarthy said that people essentially got used to s-expressions,
and m-expressions were never implemented
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression), which isn't quite the
same
as your spin implies. :)
I don't think I implied anything different than that Wikipedia quote
suggests. He said that 'a new generation of programmers appeared who
preferred S-expressions to any FORTRAN-like or ALGOL-like notation
that could be devised', which seems like a pretty solid rejection of
the m-expression idea to me. It wasn't implemented because, by the
time people got used to s-expressions, which were the core of the
system, no one wanted to bother with the m-expression layer on top,
despite the fact that it was included in the original paper.
So, I say again, maybe there's some value to the 'weird' syntax after
all, eh?
For a more modern attempt at applying Algol syntax to Lisp, see the
Dylan language. And take note that it's used even less than Common
Lisp, not that I don't think it's a pretty nice language itself. The
syntax didn't really help it gain a significant user population, and
it reduces the ease with which metaprogramming can be done in it.
But if the only thing keeping you from Lisp is parentheses, it's
certainly worth a look.
--Levi
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
