Comment Comment by juol Sigh.Implemented a scheme in my undergraduate days (in C), had a small love affair with LISP in general (but none with girls ... probably related).I'll be opinionated here:It's not readable. It really isn't. You have to be in the thick of it to see the trees. Idiomatic doesn't cut it.Operator heavy Haskell is more readable. Most of the modern functional languages read closer to the spoken word.I'd rather be presented with a legacy OO code base, than an LISP one if the LOC was anything significant.I hope I don't come across as disgruntled, I am but a mere man, and I know my limits.And still have fond memories of bedding LISP. parent juol 12 years ago
Implemented a scheme in my undergraduate days (in C), had a small love affair with LISP in general (but none with girls ... probably related).
I'll be opinionated here:
It's not readable. It really isn't. You have to be in the thick of it to see the trees. Idiomatic doesn't cut it.
Operator heavy Haskell is more readable. Most of the modern functional languages read closer to the spoken word.
I'd rather be presented with a legacy OO code base, than an LISP one if the LOC was anything significant.
I hope I don't come across as disgruntled, I am but a mere man, and I know my limits.
And still have fond memories of bedding LISP.