I think I fail to understand your somewhat poetic and evocative language, I'm afraid that I'm going to ask you to dumb it down for me:
>"The language doesn't really matter", as such it's imperative Scheme is used.
This is an obvious contradiction and clearly you meant it that way but what do you imply exactly?
>I strongly feel that if you've worked your way through SICP, and, once finished, you think "Neat. I'll rewrite this but with language X," you've really missed out on value of SICP.
>It's challenging enough to follow for people who know a Lisp going in, but using a language more mainstream and familiar to make it easier is largely counter-productive.
You claim that using an other language for SICP is "[missing] out on value" and "largely counter-productive" but you don't produce any evidence or argument to support that.
Going through SICP using a static and non-reflective language like C does seem very frustrating but using a very dynamic language like Python might indeed be a decent fit. At least I can't see what's so obviously wrong about it.
>"The language doesn't really matter", as such it's imperative Scheme is used.
This is an obvious contradiction and clearly you meant it that way but what do you imply exactly?
>I strongly feel that if you've worked your way through SICP, and, once finished, you think "Neat. I'll rewrite this but with language X," you've really missed out on value of SICP.
>It's challenging enough to follow for people who know a Lisp going in, but using a language more mainstream and familiar to make it easier is largely counter-productive.
You claim that using an other language for SICP is "[missing] out on value" and "largely counter-productive" but you don't produce any evidence or argument to support that.
Going through SICP using a static and non-reflective language like C does seem very frustrating but using a very dynamic language like Python might indeed be a decent fit. At least I can't see what's so obviously wrong about it.