There are places where "regular" folks can be helped (e.g. perhaps
supporting contagious bigs for the normal/fast ops so that the
potentially foreign op-prime notation can be ignored if that's
desirable), but handicapping capability or semantics in any direction
based on vague appeals to "average" or "regular" programmers can't
happen.
Clojure has a core feature called, of all things, 'reify', so I think
the cat is somewhat out of the bag in terms of placating morts.
There's a virtuous cycle at work here: Clojure demands that you raise
your game, and pays you back for doing so.
- Chas
On Jun 22, 2010, at 10:25 AM, Lee Spector wrote:
All of this talk about the "average guy" is ungrounded. Average over
what set and how are you getting the data? It may (or may not) be
true that that the average *programmer* understands that big numbers
(how big?) are something special, but IMHO that (if true) would
probably be because the average programmer was first exposed to bad
languages.
-Lee
On Jun 22, 2010, at 9:34 AM, Nicolas Oury wrote:
+1. The average guy understands that "big numbers" are something
special. The average guy also want to have close to native speed
when he first tries a language, not * 10 or * 20 that.
--
Lee Spector, Professor of Computer Science
School of Cognitive Science, Hampshire College
893 West Street, Amherst, MA 01002-3359
lspec...@hampshire.edu, http://hampshire.edu/lspector/
Phone: 413-559-5352, Fax: 413-559-5438
Check out Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines:
http://www.springer.com/10710 - http://gpemjournal.blogspot.com/
--
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
