On Sat, 2009-09-05 at 15:41 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Ray Dillinger scripsit:
>
> > A good language designer makes it easy and simple to write good code.
> > If that also makes it easy and simple to write bad code, then at
> > least the bad code will be simply written and, bugs and all, simple
> > to understand.
>
> If the consequences of bad hygiene (or dynamic scoping) were easy to
> understand, they would have been fixed in Lisp 1.5.
W/R/T environments and scopes, I maintain that Lisp 1.5 with its
dynamic scopes failed to make it easy and simple to write good gode.
In this case, the ease and simplicity of writing bad code in that
language is not a consequence of having done so.
Bear
PS. I mean no disrespect to the designers of early lisp; it is only
with their experience that we have come to understand how to define
lisps in which it is easier to write good code.
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
