Xah Lee schrieb:
Xah Lee wrote:
• A Ruby Illustration of Lisp Problems
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/lisp_problems_by_ruby.html
On Jan 17, 12:30 pm, André Thieme <address.good.until.
2009.may...@justmail.de> wrote:
In the Lisp style Clojure for example one does exactly the same as
Jillian James (JJ) did in Ruby:
(map #(map (fn [s] (Integer/parseInt s)) (.split % "\\s")) (line-seq
(reader "blob.txt")))
Note that you have nested map. This is a problem of function chaning
as i detailed.
Yes, Jillian also has nested maps:
IO.readlines("blob.txt").map{|line| line.split.map{|s| s.to_i }}
The other problem of cons, is commonly seen. Just about every week, we
see some perhaps beginning lisper asking how to do various trivial
list
manipulation problem, which you don't see such question or frequency
in any of modern high level lang forms.
You see questions about trivial problems every week in all forums about
programming languages.
It has nothing to do with conses. Wrong road.
The frequently asked list manipulation question we see include how to
append, prepend, or anything involving nested list such as
partitioning, reordering sublists, getting leaves, interpretation of
leaves, etc. This is caused by the cons.
Yes, same with all containers in all programming languages.
The clojure example you gave above, apparently inherited the irregular
syntax problem. (you see the #, [], % things, which is breaks the
lisp's sexp idea)
My code used 8 “mysterious symbols”:
( ) # [ ] . " %
The Ruby version had these 7:
( ) | { } . "
And of course, neither in Ruby nor Clojure they break any idea.
Also, all modern lisp basically all get fucked up by
inheriting the cons (e.g. clojure, NewLisp, Arc lisp, Liskell). Often,
they change the semantic a bit apparently as a mesaure towards solving
the cons problem. (and Qi Lisp creates a huge bag of ad hoc, extremely
ugly, syntax soup)
Funny.
What you write is an english text with words that most people can
understand.
You trick them into thinking that it actually makes sense what you say.
It is so technical, that a random would believe it.
But what you really say is about as meaningful as saying that it is
impossible to write good programs in Python, because it adds whitespace
to its syntax.
• Fundamental Problems of Lisp
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/lisp_problems.html
You wasted lots of your time. Or was this maybe generated by a bot?
Maybe http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/ or something like that?
I also found this paper that you wrote:
http://apps.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scicache/184/scimakelatex.7076.Xah+Lee.html
Another crap posting of you. But a random person might be impressed.
André
--
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
