Viewing profile — feelsboutlisps

> Lisp has sensible norms Again, in your opinion. And sorry to start blunt because I'm trying to round this out as we're getting nowhere :) To me, writing my code like it's an AST,…

I'm not arguing your opinions are anything other than your opinions. I don't agree with them however.

I don't think you can put those things on the same scale. I think it's telling that you dismiss Lisp's syntax like it's unimportant rather than acknowledging that it's the several …

> You're just paying extra attention to the lisp ones. Because people in this thread are attempting to put-forward lisps' macros (and writing code as an AST) as some big win, witho…

> But that was just an example: there are things python will never have that you can add to lisp yourself. I don't want to. I want a language that has sensible norms. > As for your…

> No. Lack of macros makes code bigger, more error prone and harder to understand. I mean, that's provably not true. Or at least not provably true. Let's me throw out at alternativ…

> Getting rid of tons of syntax is not a sacrifice at all Getting rid of syntax that usefully expresses common cases absolutely is a sacrifice. What was that Turing tar pit thing a…

> But, as long as Python is not homoiconic, it will never be as simple to express these ideas as it is in Lisp But it'll be way simpler to express literally every other day-to-day …

> Also, the syntax is one of the best parts about Lisp. I think you're in the minority there. I would hope most people agree that Lisp 'sacrifices syntax in the name of homoiconici…

> Macros are a language tool that lets you build abstractions, in some cases imo allowing better abstractions than would be possible without macros I guess 'better' is the operativ…

> Macros I don't want my teammates writing macros. When the whole programming community constantly talks about situations within regular, more expressive languages (with syntax) li…