r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 1 我是近半年来才开始关注FP的，
最近在学lisp，选择lisp
主要是考虑看是否能用到实际项目中，
1 lisp的速度接近C
2 库也比较多
3 第二老的语言很稳定。
lisp主要的优势是macro，
说 macro is not just text substitution
我还没有体会到。 | v*s
发帖数: 946 | 2 你是说的common lisp还是说的scheme？ | b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 3 lisp's syntax is not bearable for all the people, not for me. So I wouldn't
use it (unless it changes to something like javascript).
Macro is a double edge sword: it attacks the enemy, and it attacks you.
A thing for sure is that, nobody can handle lisp well only after 6 months
training, like what is for Java. So if people are using lisp as the
mainsteam, the quality of softwares would be much higher than now.
All that being said, no one can chanllenge lisp as THE most flexible and
extensible | r*y
发帖数: 706 | 4 emacs being the most powerful editor?
I'm not sure how much I can believe your word about word now..
't
be
accommodate
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lisp's syntax is not bearable for all the people, not for me. So I wouldn't
: use it (unless it changes to something like javascript).
: Macro is a double edge sword: it attacks the enemy, and it attacks you.
: A thing for sure is that, nobody can handle lisp well only after 6 months
: training, like what is for Java. So if people are using lisp as the
: mainsteam, the quality of softwares would be much higher than now.
: All that being said, no one can chanllenge lisp as THE most flexible and
: extensible
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 5 common lisp.
【在 v*s 的大作中提到】
: 你是说的common lisp还是说的scheme？
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 6 I think he said emacs is the most powerful editor,
which has nothing to do with his points of lisp,
it's personal favor, like I say my wife is the most
beautiful lady.
【在 r*y 的大作中提到】
: emacs being the most powerful editor?
: I'm not sure how much I can believe your word about word now..
:
: 't
: be
: accommodate
| E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | | r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 8 comp.lang.lisp
activity: high
【在 E*****m 的大作中提到】
: 真的還有人用 LIsp 嗎？
| E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 9 可以說一下你自己想在什麼樣的情況下用 Lisp 嗎?
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: comp.lang.lisp
: activity: high
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 10 First of all, I want to taste functional programming style.
and lisp is one of dominated languages for
artificial intelligence programming, maybe I can use it.
My learning lisp is in very early stage, comparing with Python,
I have not gotten its powerfulness yet.
【在 E*****m 的大作中提到】
: 可以說一下你自己想在什麼樣的情況下用 Lisp 嗎?
| | | E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 11 我的感覺是Lisp 很少新的 users, Haskell 好像比較 fashionable。
不過我猜做NLP 之類的可能Lisp 還是最好的。
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: First of all, I want to taste functional programming style.
: and lisp is one of dominated languages for
: artificial intelligence programming, maybe I can use it.
: My learning lisp is in very early stage, comparing with Python,
: I have not gotten its powerfulness yet.
| b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 12 Name me an editor that is more powerful than emacs/xemacs then.
Note, I am talking about editors, not IDEs. So eclipse can be a
candidate as an editor but not a java IDE. Only hard-asses program
Java with emacs rather than eclipse, although you can do the pretty
much same thing for Java dev in emacs as you can do in eclipse, in a
harder and more twisted way.
The reason I say emacs is powerful lies in the fact that emacs is
undeniably the most flexible and most extensible one. It's
configurati
【在 r*y 的大作中提到】
: emacs being the most powerful editor?
: I'm not sure how much I can believe your word about word now..
:
: 't
: be
: accommodate
| b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 13 You will get its point after using it seriously for a period of time.
This is just like to use vi/emacs. First, you would use windows
notepad, since its the most simple and straightforward one that nobody
would misunderstand. And when you first contact vi/emacs, you would
think it's too much and you do not really see the point. But once you
force yourself into it for a while, you will find its good and you
won't be able to live without it. Just like this post I am typing, I
compose it using
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: First of all, I want to taste functional programming style.
: and lisp is one of dominated languages for
: artificial intelligence programming, maybe I can use it.
: My learning lisp is in very early stage, comparing with Python,
: I have not gotten its powerfulness yet.
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 14 Thanks for your reply.
but nobody answer how functional programming in lisp is,
it's perfect or good enough?
I know lisp is not lazy-binding, so it has side-effects.
However, no side-effects is a major feature of functional
programming.
If I'm wrong, pls correct me.
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: You will get its point after using it seriously for a period of time.
: This is just like to use vi/emacs. First, you would use windows
: notepad, since its the most simple and straightforward one that nobody
: would misunderstand. And when you first contact vi/emacs, you would
: think it's too much and you do not really see the point. But once you
: force yourself into it for a while, you will find its good and you
: won't be able to live without it. Just like this post I am typing, I
: compose it using
| b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 15 It really depends on your taste to say whether lisp is good enough or
not. lisp certainly has it strength:
+ It is much more flexible than almost any other languages. With the
powerful macro system, you can custom the language as much as you
want. Think of the possibility to define language construct such as
foreach by yourself.
+ There is no particular type system to fight against, as constract to
statically typed languages like ML/Ocaml/Haskell. This,
controversially, is good a | r*********g
发帖数: 96 | 16 新手 LISP 和 Scheme 区别到底多大啊？ | b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 17 Use lisp, don't use scheme. Real lisp people don't consider scheme as
real lisp.
If a language comes from academia, not industry, it is mostly junk.
Scheme is.
Scala is probably a slight exception for this. But we will see. Twitter
is just a piece of junk anyway
【在 r*********g 的大作中提到】
: 新手 LISP 和 Scheme 区别到底多大啊？
| o****p
发帖数: 162 | 18 If you are only pissed off by parenthesis in Lisp, well, that's not a big
problem at all. In emacs, which you seem to know well, you can easily set up
parenthesis match (online mode) during your coding. Whenever you put your
cursor at any (left or right) parenthesis, you will see the matched pair
parenthesis (right or left) highlighted. Once you get used to it, you almost
forgot about the issue of matching parenthesis.
Yes, Lisp is the most wonderful language I have ever used. You can do OO (
re
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: It really depends on your taste to say whether lisp is good enough or
: not. lisp certainly has it strength:
: + It is much more flexible than almost any other languages. With the
: powerful macro system, you can custom the language as much as you
: want. Think of the possibility to define language construct such as
: foreach by yourself.
:
: + There is no particular type system to fight against, as constract to
: statically typed languages like ML/Ocaml/Haskell. This,
: controversially, is good a
| h*i
发帖数: 3446 | 19 I agree. Parenthesis ain't really the problem at all. They basically
disappeared after a week. The new way of thinking takes a lot of exercise to
get used to though.
up
almost
flexible
【在 o****p 的大作中提到】
: If you are only pissed off by parenthesis in Lisp, well, that's not a big
: problem at all. In emacs, which you seem to know well, you can easily set up
: parenthesis match (online mode) during your coding. Whenever you put your
: cursor at any (left or right) parenthesis, you will see the matched pair
: parenthesis (right or left) highlighted. Once you get used to it, you almost
: forgot about the issue of matching parenthesis.
: Yes, Lisp is the most wonderful language I have ever used. You can do OO (
: re
| h*i
发帖数: 3446 | 20 Try Clojure.
As a Lisp, Clojure enforces FP better than CL and Scheme as data are
immutable in Clojure by default. Also, if you don't like parenthesis,
Clojure has less of them and has more varieties ([] for vector, {} for map,
etc.), so the code looks less dense.
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: 我是近半年来才开始关注FP的，
: 最近在学lisp，选择lisp
: 主要是考虑看是否能用到实际项目中，
: 1 lisp的速度接近C
: 2 库也比较多
: 3 第二老的语言很稳定。
: lisp主要的优势是macro，
: 说 macro is not just text substitution
: 我还没有体会到。
| | | r*********g
发帖数: 96 | 21 新手 LISP 和 Scheme 区别到底多大啊？ | b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 22 Use lisp, don't use scheme. Real lisp people don't consider scheme as
real lisp.
If a language comes from academia, not industry, it is mostly junk.
Scheme is.
Scala is probably a slight exception for this. But we will see. Twitter
is just a piece of junk anyway
【在 r*********g 的大作中提到】
: 新手 LISP 和 Scheme 区别到底多大啊？
| o****p
发帖数: 162 | 23 If you are only pissed off by parenthesis in Lisp, well, that's not a big
problem at all. In emacs, which you seem to know well, you can easily set up
parenthesis match (online mode) during your coding. Whenever you put your
cursor at any (left or right) parenthesis, you will see the matched pair
parenthesis (right or left) highlighted. Once you get used to it, you almost
forgot about the issue of matching parenthesis.
Yes, Lisp is the most wonderful language I have ever used. You can do OO (
really good OO), structural or procedural programming, whatever you like
most. I don't know much about functional programming, so I guess you can
make that happen in Lisp if that's what you prefer most. It's very flexible
- not much due to macro in my experience. It's because of its versatility
for programming paradigm, and really flexible language features. I like its
generic programming paradigm most. This means you can make your design
really much much abstract and general for any later refactoring and
maintenance.
Just my opinions.
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: It really depends on your taste to say whether lisp is good enough or
: not. lisp certainly has it strength:
: + It is much more flexible than almost any other languages. With the
: powerful macro system, you can custom the language as much as you
: want. Think of the possibility to define language construct such as
: foreach by yourself.
:
: + There is no particular type system to fight against, as constract to
: statically typed languages like ML/Ocaml/Haskell. This,
: controversially, is good a
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 24 我是近半年来才开始关注FP的，
最近在学lisp，选择lisp
主要是考虑看是否能用到实际项目中，
1 lisp的速度接近C
2 库也比较多
3 第二老的语言很稳定。
lisp主要的优势是macro，
说 macro is not just text substitution
我还没有体会到。 | v*s
发帖数: 946 | 25 你是说的common lisp还是说的scheme？ | b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 26 lisp's syntax is not bearable for all the people, not for me. So I wouldn't
use it (unless it changes to something like javascript).
Macro is a double edge sword: it attacks the enemy, and it attacks you.
A thing for sure is that, nobody can handle lisp well only after 6 months
training, like what is for Java. So if people are using lisp as the
mainsteam, the quality of softwares would be much higher than now.
All that being said, no one can chanllenge lisp as THE most flexible and
extensible and versatile language. It is a great language, but it could be
greater if the lisp developing people could be less stubborn and accommodate
modern OOP into it (not CLOS please). This is just like emacs, which I
believe the most powerful and most flexible editor in human history, BUT its
undo/redo is like shit and they wouldn't consider to change. | r*y
发帖数: 706 | 27 emacs being the most powerful editor?
I'm not sure how much I can believe your word about word now..
't
be
accommodate
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lisp's syntax is not bearable for all the people, not for me. So I wouldn't
: use it (unless it changes to something like javascript).
: Macro is a double edge sword: it attacks the enemy, and it attacks you.
: A thing for sure is that, nobody can handle lisp well only after 6 months
: training, like what is for Java. So if people are using lisp as the
: mainsteam, the quality of softwares would be much higher than now.
: All that being said, no one can chanllenge lisp as THE most flexible and
: extensible and versatile language. It is a great language, but it could be
: greater if the lisp developing people could be less stubborn and accommodate
: modern OOP into it (not CLOS please). This is just like emacs, which I
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 28 common lisp.
【在 v*s 的大作中提到】
: 你是说的common lisp还是说的scheme？
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 29 I think he said emacs is the most powerful editor,
which has nothing to do with his points of lisp,
it's personal favor, like I say my wife is the most
beautiful lady.
【在 r*y 的大作中提到】
: emacs being the most powerful editor?
: I'm not sure how much I can believe your word about word now..
:
: 't
: be
: accommodate
| E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | | | | r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 31 comp.lang.lisp
activity: high
【在 E*****m 的大作中提到】
: 真的還有人用 LIsp 嗎？
| E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 32 可以說一下你自己想在什麼樣的情況下用 Lisp 嗎?
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: comp.lang.lisp
: activity: high
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 33 First of all, I want to taste functional programming style.
and lisp is one of dominated languages for
artificial intelligence programming, maybe I can use it.
My learning lisp is in very early stage, comparing with Python,
I have not gotten its powerfulness yet.
【在 E*****m 的大作中提到】
: 可以說一下你自己想在什麼樣的情況下用 Lisp 嗎?
| E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 34 我的感覺是Lisp 很少新的 users, Haskell 好像比較 fashionable。
不過我猜做NLP 之類的可能Lisp 還是最好的。
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: First of all, I want to taste functional programming style.
: and lisp is one of dominated languages for
: artificial intelligence programming, maybe I can use it.
: My learning lisp is in very early stage, comparing with Python,
: I have not gotten its powerfulness yet.
| b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 35 Name me an editor that is more powerful than emacs/xemacs then.
Note, I am talking about editors, not IDEs. So eclipse can be a
candidate as an editor but not a java IDE. Only hard-asses program
Java with emacs rather than eclipse, although you can do the pretty
much same thing for Java dev in emacs as you can do in eclipse, in a
harder and more twisted way.
The reason I say emacs is powerful lies in the fact that emacs is
undeniably the most flexible and most extensible one. It's
configuration language is elisp, which is a full fledged programming
language very close to common lisp (with a list of editor specific
APIs for you to use). In this respect, emacs is like an operating
system, which you can use elisp to write application. This is just
like firefox, which, to some extent, can be understood as an operating
system where you can use javascript/XPCom interface to write add-ons
as applications.
【在 r*y 的大作中提到】
: emacs being the most powerful editor?
: I'm not sure how much I can believe your word about word now..
:
: 't
: be
: accommodate
| b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 36 You will get its point after using it seriously for a period of time.
This is just like to use vi/emacs. First, you would use windows
notepad, since its the most simple and straightforward one that nobody
would misunderstand. And when you first contact vi/emacs, you would
think it's too much and you do not really see the point. But once you
force yourself into it for a while, you will find its good and you
won't be able to live without it. Just like this post I am typing, I
compose it using emacs, which is much more effective for me than using
the bbs built-in editor (which is essentially notepad).
For CL, I recommend you to force yourself to understand and use the
macro system. It is truly powerful and you do not find it in other
languages. Well, you can always argue that Java just lives well
without a macro system and it is much more wide adopted by common
programmers. That, coming back to the emacs analogy, most people just
live well with notepad and they do not bother with emacs.
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: First of all, I want to taste functional programming style.
: and lisp is one of dominated languages for
: artificial intelligence programming, maybe I can use it.
: My learning lisp is in very early stage, comparing with Python,
: I have not gotten its powerfulness yet.
| r*******n
发帖数: 3020 | 37 Thanks for your reply.
but nobody answer how functional programming in lisp is,
it's perfect or good enough?
I know lisp is not lazy-binding, so it has side-effects.
However, no side-effects is a major feature of functional
programming.
If I'm wrong, pls correct me.
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: You will get its point after using it seriously for a period of time.
: This is just like to use vi/emacs. First, you would use windows
: notepad, since its the most simple and straightforward one that nobody
: would misunderstand. And when you first contact vi/emacs, you would
: think it's too much and you do not really see the point. But once you
: force yourself into it for a while, you will find its good and you
: won't be able to live without it. Just like this post I am typing, I
: compose it using emacs, which is much more effective for me than using
: the bbs built-in editor (which is essentially notepad).
: For CL, I recommend you to force yourself to understand and use the
| b***e
发帖数: 1419 | 38 It really depends on your taste to say whether lisp is good enough or
not. lisp certainly has it strength:
+ It is much more flexible than almost any other languages. With the
powerful macro system, you can custom the language as much as you
want. Think of the possibility to define language construct such as
foreach by yourself.
+ There is no particular type system to fight against, as constract to
statically typed languages like ML/Ocaml/Haskell. This,
controversially, is good and bad. The good thing is you are given
more power, while the bad thing is that you are in danger of abusing
this power.
+ There is built-in statefulness, i.e., it is not a "pure" functional
language. This, as well, is controversially good and bad (where I
think it is certainly better than worse). If you try to use Haskell
(which is so pure) to implement a memoization mechanism, you will
certainly understand what I mean.
- The only thing I am so pissed off by lisp is its highly
parenthesized syntax. That is like crazy and incur programmers lots
of difficulties.
You have a misunstanding between purity and laziness. They are not
totally orthogonal but are not so tightly related as well. Usually,
it is very hard for a stateful language to be lazy, but on the other
hand, there could be perfectly pure and non-lazy language. If I were
to say it, laziness is the most evil thing in this world and do not
ever touch it. It is much much more confusing than useful, especially
when it comes to debugging. By that I mean, if you want to find
something practical, stay away from Haskell.
Not having side effects, in my opinion, is certainly NOT a major
feature of functional languages. Usually, you need to define a class
by what it must have, not by what it must not have. If side-effect
free is the major criteria, then only Haskell qualifies, others like
ML/Caml will be excluded. | h*i
发帖数: 3446 | 39 I agree. Parenthesis ain't really the problem at all. They basically
disappeared after a week. The new way of thinking takes a lot of exercise to
get used to though.
up
almost
flexible
【在 o****p 的大作中提到】
: If you are only pissed off by parenthesis in Lisp, well, that's not a big
: problem at all. In emacs, which you seem to know well, you can easily set up
: parenthesis match (online mode) during your coding. Whenever you put your
: cursor at any (left or right) parenthesis, you will see the matched pair
: parenthesis (right or left) highlighted. Once you get used to it, you almost
: forgot about the issue of matching parenthesis.
: Yes, Lisp is the most wonderful language I have ever used. You can do OO (
: really good OO), structural or procedural programming, whatever you like
: most. I don't know much about functional programming, so I guess you can
: make that happen in Lisp if that's what you prefer most. It's very flexible
| h*i
发帖数: 3446 | 40 Try Clojure.
As a Lisp, Clojure enforces FP better than CL and Scheme as data are
immutable in Clojure by default. Also, if you don't like parenthesis,
Clojure has less of them and has more varieties ([] for vector, {} for map,
etc.), so the code looks less dense.
【在 r*******n 的大作中提到】
: 我是近半年来才开始关注FP的，
: 最近在学lisp，选择lisp
: 主要是考虑看是否能用到实际项目中，
: 1 lisp的速度接近C
: 2 库也比较多
: 3 第二老的语言很稳定。
: lisp主要的优势是macro，
: 说 macro is not just text substitution
: 我还没有体会到。
|
|
