On 12/15/2010 7:18 PM, javajosh wrote:
On Dec 14, 11:56 pm, nickiknick...@gmail.com wrote:
Lisp is Not an Acceptable Lisp
Friday, April 14, 2006
Clojure wasn't out then.
Right. I picked a *really terrible* subject line to basically discuss
the question of whether Clojure is the language
Just ran across:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/04/lisp-is-not-acceptable-lisp.html
Whoah! I had no idea there was so much, uh, 'intricacy' going on
behind Lisp. :)
Anyway, it was interesting to read it having a bit of Clojure under my
belt. With the exception of types, it seems like
javajosh javaj...@gmail.com writes:
Just ran across:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/04/lisp-is-not-acceptable-lisp.html
Whoah! I had no idea there was so much, uh, 'intricacy' going on
behind Lisp. :)
Anyway, it was interesting to read it having a bit of Clojure under my
belt.
Steve is trolling with that Lisp post.
There is so much noise in what he says,
there is no point beginning to reply.
And all of it would be off-topic.
Ignore it.
Tim Daly
On 12/14/2010 11:23 PM, Alex Osborne wrote:
javajoshjavaj...@gmail.com writes:
Just ran across:
Lisp is Not an Acceptable Lisp
Friday, April 14, 2006
Clojure wasn't out then.
--
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
