Paul Rubin wrote: > Forth was always unreadable to me but I never did much. I thought its > aficionados were silly. Yes if you have a complicated math expression > in Lisp, you have to sit there for a moment rearranging it in infix in > your mind to figure out what it says. The point is that such > expressions aren't all that common in typical Lisp code. >
I find Lisp, Forth and classic funny-symbol APL relatively readable (well, once you've learned the funny symbols in the APL case) That spans prefix/postfix/infix... The commonality is simple evaluation order, no damn precedence rules. I can _cope_ with precedence rules, I'm not a moron, but I prefer languages that don't make heavy use of them. Well, more accurately, sources that don't, but most coders in communities of languages-with-lots-of-precedence-rules consider reliance on those precedence rules in source code idiomatic. And precedence rules, once you get beyond a few (sometimes rather misleading) similarities to the ones that most people are made to learn early on for arithmetic notation, can vary a lot from computer language to computer language. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
