Lisp is Abstract Syntax
michaelrbernste.in
Lisp is Abstract Syntax
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#2Well, yeah.
I think the popularity of lisp comes down to the hostility the mit ai lab had towards noam chomsky who in the 1960s spoke out about the vietnam war and thus bit the hand that funds cs research.
All other computer languages (except for forth) embraced formal grammar concepts but mit rejected them out of spite.
If mit had stopped burning the dragon book and embraced algol syntax we might have been spared the horrors of c, c++ and java but no, they just gave us 1 more reason rt 128 is a boulevard ofbroken dreams.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#3The abstract syntax was intended to be used writing programs until designers could get around to creating a concrete syntax with human-readable punctuation (instead of Lots of Irritating Silly Parentheses), but programmers soon got used to programming directly in abstract syntax.
That's some programmers who got used to the syntax. It may be absolutely true that once you get used to LISP's syntax, it is better than any other. The problem is that since one is dealing with human beings, and with human beings you have the power of first impression and the tendency to make snap decisions based on these, people initial difficulty in grokking LISP's syntax is always going to be a hurdle for the language.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#4"preventing advancement" is a pretty bold assumption.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#5The abstract syntax was intended to be used writing programs until designers could get around to creating a concrete syntax with human-readable punctuation (instead of Lots of Irritating Silly Parentheses), but programmers soon got used to programming directly in abstract syntax. That's some programmers who got used to the syntax. It may be absolutely true that once you get used to LISP's syntax, it is better than an…
Is grokking Lisp's parenthesized s-expressions actually difficult though? I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it. I don't think I've ever picked up another class of languages faster; even python took more effort from me.
Basically, I think it's a marketing problem.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#6The abstract syntax was intended to be used writing programs until designers could get around to creating a concrete syntax with human-readable punctuation (instead of Lots of Irritating Silly Parentheses), but programmers soon got used to programming directly in abstract syntax. That's some programmers who got used to the syntax. It may be absolutely true that once you get used to LISP's syntax, it is better than an…
Is grokking Lisp's parenthesized s-expressions actually difficult though? I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it. I don't think I've ever picked up another class of languages faster; even python took more effort from me. Basically, I think it's a marketing problem.
We're hard-wired for Lisp. Broca's area 44,45 and 47 are responsible for processing hierarchical structures.[1] That's why it's so easy to reason about Lisp code.
[1] http://www.letras.ufrj.br/poslinguistica/recursion/papers/17...
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is grokking Lisp's parenthesized s-expressions actually difficult though? I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it. I don't think I've ever picked up another class of languages faster; even python took more effort from me. Basically, I think it's a marketing problem.
We're hard-wired for Lisp. Broca's area 44,45 and 47 are responsible for processing hierarchical structures.[1] That's why it's so easy to reason about Lisp code. [1] http://www.letras.ufrj.br/poslinguistica/recursion/papers/17...
I don't see what that specifically has to do with Lisp. Virtually every programming language in use has a recursive hierarchical structure.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#8The abstract syntax was intended to be used writing programs until designers could get around to creating a concrete syntax with human-readable punctuation (instead of Lots of Irritating Silly Parentheses), but programmers soon got used to programming directly in abstract syntax. That's some programmers who got used to the syntax. It may be absolutely true that once you get used to LISP's syntax, it is better than an…
Is grokking Lisp's parenthesized s-expressions actually difficult though? I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it. I don't think I've ever picked up another class of languages faster; even python took more effort from me. Basically, I think it's a marketing problem.
I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it.
That is pretty much what I meant. But given that the language expressions people are exposed to in their lives before LISP inherently aren't going to look like LISP, this a "marketing problem" that isn't going to go away. LISP doesn't look like natural language, that won't change and will always be hard for people to get over.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#9The abstract syntax was intended to be used writing programs until designers could get around to creating a concrete syntax with human-readable punctuation (instead of Lots of Irritating Silly Parentheses), but programmers soon got used to programming directly in abstract syntax. That's some programmers who got used to the syntax. It may be absolutely true that once you get used to LISP's syntax, it is better than an…
Is grokking Lisp's parenthesized s-expressions actually difficult though? I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it. I don't think I've ever picked up another class of languages faster; even python took more effort from me. Basically, I think it's a marketing problem.
I always liked The Rise of Worse Is Better in explaining why C and its derivatives became the standard.
Re: Lisp is Abstract Syntax
#10The abstract syntax was intended to be used writing programs until designers could get around to creating a concrete syntax with human-readable punctuation (instead of Lots of Irritating Silly Parentheses), but programmers soon got used to programming directly in abstract syntax. That's some programmers who got used to the syntax. It may be absolutely true that once you get used to LISP's syntax, it is better than an…
Is grokking Lisp's parenthesized s-expressions actually difficult though? I think that the real problem is that developers believe that they will find it difficult before they try it, rather than actually finding it difficult when they eventually do try it. I don't think I've ever picked up another class of languages faster; even python took more effort from me. Basically, I think it's a marketing problem.
I have to respectfully disagree. I have coded for years in a lot of C-style languages, mainly C, Java, Python, Ruby & JavaScript and I've been struggling with the Clojure book (and various tutorials) for over a year. It's not just marketing, it's a very different mindset and one I'm not convinced is ever going to appeal to a large class of smart programmers (yes I guess I'm saying I don't think I'm dumb and hope I'm not alone in this feeling).
I've heard Lisp described as an autistic language, and I think there's something to that. I don't think it's for everyone. I'm not on board that macros, homoiconicity and some of the other stated benefits of lisps are worth 'giving up syntax' for and I am far from convinced that lisps are the future of programming.
I'm a huge fan of Rich Hickey and I want to love Clojure, I just can't. It's not for me and it's not a marketing thing. Rich is the best marketing a language could hope for.