On Sunday 25 June 2006 13:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Re: Possible FAQ question: The myth about Lisp code being
> 'write only' (Larry Clapp
I've heard it. And even if I hadn't I think it's worth some consideration.
IMO, part of the problem is that lisp doesn't map well to the pseudo-code
that most non-lispers have in their heads. I suppose lispers are endowed with
another pseudo-code and it is more flexible because they know how to use a
dynamic language.
The kernel of truth is that it is possible with lisp to use macro's so heavily
that it is hard to adjust to someone else's code. But it should be the case
that that code uses lisp macros to "build the language toward the
problem" ("dynamic languages" is an asset? double-edged sword? What?). Once
you understand the purpose of the macros that bridged the gap, you can read
the lisp program better than you can the pseudo-code.
So my advice: sell them on the idea of lisp as a dynamic language, and the ROI
realized once you understand the abstractions it made available to the
program you are trying to read.
--
- Best regards,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Gardeners mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
