On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 9:04 PM, daly <d...@axiom-developer.org> wrote: > I believe that Robert missed the fundamental point though. It is > NOT just the space of ideas that makes lisp "the right language". > Another key reason is "impedance matching". (An impedance mismatch > is when you hook a soda straw to a firehose). > > Programs exist to bridge the gap between the idea domain and the > machine domain. Some languages are close to the machine, like assembler, > so you have to "carry your idea" all the way to the machine. Some > languages are close to the problem (e.g. Mathematica) but the compiler > has to cross the gap to the machine. This is where the ability to > create domain-specific languages in the same syntax matters. > > Lisp is the only language I know that allows you to work across the > whole spectrum in a single language. It is possible to say > (integrate (car x)) > which takes the 0 displacement off the x pointer (machine) and then > does a mathematical integration routine (problem) and does it all with > the same syntax and semantics.
+1 to all of this. > I wouldn't worry that we will stop creating new languages. > We have yet to explore the space of unicode replacements for the > semi-colon (although Fortress is starting). Kanji semi-colons. > I can't wait! I sure can. I never intend to use any language I can't type without meta keys and/or a special keyboard. :) -- Protege: What is this seething mass of parentheses?! Master: Your father's Lisp REPL. This is the language of a true hacker. Not as clumsy or random as C++; a language for a more civilized age. -- 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 patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
