On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 01:32:07PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake thusly:
> Andy and others (especially Paul Graham) have convinced
> me to learn LISP because it sounds so cool.  I just spent $54 on
> Graham's ANSI Common LISP book and intend to dive in.   (I got
> Norvig's book too.)

I have been pondering this very issue myself. I am looking at LISP but
more seriously considering Scheme. It's sort of like the perl vs python
thing. LISP seems rather baroque... And it was Paul Graham's writings that
have moved me to look into it. He is a recent new hero of mine. That
reminds me: I have his excellent book "Hackers and Painters" which I have
already read and greatly enjoyed. I is available for loan if anyone wants
it. I intend to donate it to the KPLUG library. Does anyone really check
books out of the kplug library? This book is the sort of thing I wish I
could run off a bunch of copies of and give them away to friends. Having
just one copy of it is so inefficient, buying many is expensive, and a lot
of people won't read it unless it is dead tree.

> Paul Graham's papers provide the best example I've found for actually
> doing something useful with LISP....rapid development of
> a web server component.  Besides that I'm starving for justification
> of where LISP is actually used for real benefits.  Any ideas????
> 
> Besides stretching my brain, I'd like to think LISP knowledge
> actually is useful.  I know..wishful thinking.

I think the idea of functional programming is very interesting and I am
puzzled as to why it has not grown in popularity. More compact code
meaning less to verify/debug,  no side-effects, inherent modularity, etc.
are all very good things that we are encouraged to do in imperative
languages but often do not because it is so easy to exercise those bad
habits.

The only reason I can think of for the lack of popularity is that LISP got
a reputation for being slow back when cpu time was expensive and C and
other imperative languages took over all of the mindshare.

I love the idea of functional programming as being described as what you
want done not how you want it done. In learning about cfengine I see that
cfengine employs similar ideas in that you describe the idea system state
rather than how to get there.

-- 
Tracy Reed
http://ultraviolet.org
This message is cryptographically signed for your protection.
Info: http://copilotconsulting.com/sig

Attachment: pgpk7hZlQFRbT.pgp
Description: PGP signature

-- 

KPLUG-List mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to