I think this discussion is getting too long, but anyway ..
Coming from an imperative background, especially Java which is a lot
bloated, when I tried to read Lisp code, I start to get the feeling that I
am staring at the same place for a long time. In an imperative setting, it
definitely means that I am unable to understand the code. However, in the
case of Lisp, since it is more condensed than Java, even though I am looking
at the same place for a longer time, I am actually assimilating at almost
the same rate!
I believe that for Lisp beginners coming from Imperative style, the Brain is
being fooled into believing that it is dumb! Actually it is doing perfectly
fine as long as it understand the different functions/API.
Parenthesis, prefix notations were never a big issue for me. In fact, the
parenthesis are mostly invisible in properly syntax highlighted and properly
indented code. However proper indentation is the key. In other languages you
can figure out things based on syntax symbols like [] { } => and so on.
Since Lisp does not have any of these, the only support the Programmer has
is Indentation!
I should not say this ... but just to get a feel I stared at some Scala code
for a while and said to myself - "What the hell is this! Why am I feeling it
painful to move my eyes so much and there is so much of syntactic noise".
It is just a matter of getting used to. Granted not everybody will feel
comfortable in the same time and so there will be resistance to Lisp style
syntax for a while.
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 9:21 AM, David Nolen <dnolen.li...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I don't think anybody in the Clojure community wants to Clojure to be a
> > fringe language.
>
> Actually, I don't mind if Clojure retains a certain degree of "fringe"
> status.
>
> To clarify, I think the ideal size for a language community is
> somewhere in between the two extremes. You certainly want enough
> people who love working with a language that the language keeps moving
> forward and cool libraries and tools are continually being developed.
>
> On the other hand, there's something very nice about knowing a
> language that is a bit of a "secret weapon". Sometimes companies
> advertise that they are looking for a certain language, not because
> they really need that language, but because they know that any
> developer who knows that language is likely to be of a certain high
> caliber. They use the language as a way to weed out run-of-the-mill
> software engineers. Languages like Haskell, Scheme, and ML are often
> used for this purpose (not Java, of course, it's too mainstream).
> Such job posts also send a signal to talented developers that their
> company is a special place to work, because they know the value of
> "secret weapon" languages. I would actively like to see Clojure
> remain obscure enough to fall into this category.
>
> I sympathize with the original poster's point, however. I have been
> using Lisp dialects for 20 years, and I still find Lisp code harder to
> read than its mainstream counterparts. The parentheses provide a
> visual sameness to the code that forces you to think very hard to
> understand it. Python, on the other hand, is the most readable
> language I've encountered. So, despite all the claims that you'll
> "learn to love parentheses", I'll say that it's not necessarily true.
> I have no love for the hyper-consistent prefix syntax for functions,
> macros, and keywords, and all the deeply-nested parentheses that
> result. Still, I'm flexible enough that I have no problem
> *tolerating* Lisp's syntax. And if other people can't see past the
> parentheses and understand the value of the language, I have a hard
> time getting worked up about that (see above point).
>
> --
> 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<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
--
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
