On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 11:03 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:29:01AM -0800, Mark Schoonover wrote: > > Some good reading: > > > > http://www.mschaef.com/blog/2008/02/14 > > Sometimes I think it is just as much fun to read articles about Lisp > as to program Lisp itself. I liked this article and I personally > despise car and cdr. I've heard arguments why they are better than > first and rest in some cases but my aesthetic sensibilities still cringe. > > I take comfort in fact that McCarthy himself favors first and rest. > > Chris >
I'm finding Lisp to be more challenging than SICP itself. The concepts so far I understand, but there have been times doing the exercises, Lisp has been more of the challenge. I've read the thread about "You don't really understand something until you program it", but I don't think this means I don't understand the concepts simply because Lisp is proving to be a hurdle. What if I did the exercises in Perl instead? Would that mean I understand the concepts? Someone on the list is starting to write a Lisp processor in Python. Does that mean he only understands the implementation of Lisp, but won't understand the concepts behind SICP? -- Mark Schoonover, CMDBA http://www.linkedin.com/in/markschoonover http://marksitblog.blogspot.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
