On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 5:24 AM, andy mcmurry <mcmurry.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > Clojure, having its origins in LISP, is a better fit for serious NLP work > than Groovy
Sorry, I have to call this one out. I don't think having origins in LISP makes anything a better fit for serious NLP work. Not that I'm against Clojure or that I'm recommending Groovy. But there's nothing inherent about LISP that makes it a better fit for NLP. If you want to argue that functional paradigms (e.g. LISP, Haskell, Scala, Map-Reduce) are better for serious NLP work, I might believe that argument. But I don't think there's anything special about LISP that makes it better for NLP than other functional languages. Steve
