On 12/15/2010 7:18 PM, javajosh wrote:
On Dec 14, 11:56 pm, nickik<nick...@gmail.com> wrote:
Lisp is Not an Acceptable Lisp
Friday, April 14, 2006
Clojure wasn't out then.
Right. I picked a *really terrible* subject line to basically discuss
the question of whether Clojure is the language that answered most of
Yegge's concerns about Lisp adoption. Thanks to Alex, I think that the
answer is almost certainly "yes".
@Tim Daly: I don't know a lot about Lisp, but I do know a little bit
about rhetoric vs. rationality, and that post had the ring of truth to
it. It read like the work of a legit advocate searching for reasons
why the target of his advocacy was not widely adopted in a kind of
soul-searching way. As such I think it's an effective work. Of course,
I could be wrong and Yegge might have written the whole thing as
merely an attention getting ploy. That possibility exists for every
written work, but I see no compelling evidence for that belief.
I've been programming in lisp for nearly 40 years. There are many things
to say in reply but all of them are off topic for this list. As was
pointed out,
he could not have been talking about Clojure.
Tim Daly
--
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
