> > "No programmer who learned Lisp ever gave up before he learned Lisp."That > > would be the obvious retort, but my observation was empirical, so I > am afraid you need numbers, not word games. > > You seem awfully hostile, by the way. Won't that make it harder to > conduct an intelligent exchange of value to lurkers? > > > I wonder, how many people gave up trying to learn Lisp because the > > language was too hard for them to read? Anyone like to bet that the number > > was more than zero?Sorry, no one ever discovered Lisp, decided it would be > > great for > programming, started learning it and then gave up because they could not > handle the syntax.
Uh. Clearly no one would be dumb enough to admit it in front of the entire usenet world, right? - Mr. NoOne P.S. I am still going to get back to it when I get some time, really. LISP seems intriguing and superior, almost a magical Rubik's cube waiting for me. I just stumbled across Python in the meantime and code started flowing - I got distracted. I have CL (& Scheme) on all my machines awaiting my focus.... I'll join the flock any day now. :-) I've just been busy. There is a cost to learning and I've not had the spare change to date. But New Years resolutions need to be made: I could get up a couple hours early and spend some quality time with CL, do a daily hour jog, and eat a really heathly breakfast. Writing myself a note on this. P.P.S. Undoubtedly not learning a syntax either means not enough time was put in or the student lacked proper intelligence. This will always bias the significance of learning syntax as a factor in choice of language to be under reported. cheers -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list