On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Kurt H Maier <karmaf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Niki Yoshiuchi <aplu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Here is C++'s grammar: > http://www.csci.csusb.edu/dick/c++std/cd2/gram.html > > Here is Lisp's grammar: > > http://www.devincook.com/goldparser/doc/meta-language/grammar-LISP.htm > > I don't think I've ever seen a lisp program that conforms to that > grammar. It even says in the link it's a 'primitive form.' There's > no way I could possibly care less than I do about lisp, but to say > that's "lisp's grammar" is a misrepresentation of what actual lisp > looks like. > > -- > # Kurt H Maier > > You're right, I apologize. I did a quick google search and that was the first link I clicked on. That said, lisp's grammar is still remarkably short compared to most other programming languages. That doesn't necessarily make it good, just simple. I'm not a lisp evangelist, just making a comment on why someone might say that lisp has clean and elegant syntax.
