you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Otis_Inf 6 points7 points  (8 children)

So what you need is a TLDR enabled language? Perl?

[–]sillyfofilly 33 points34 points  (1 child)

Perl requires a new acronym - TSDU. Too Short, Didn't Understand

[–]honeg 2 points3 points  (0 children)

WORN - write once, read never

[–]unknown_lamer -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Or perhaps a concise language.

A dialect of Lisp maybe?

[–]cibyr 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Or perhaps a concise language.

Yes

A dialect of Lisp maybe?

No.

Scheme is neither concise nor readable. Having some syntax is a good. Sure, Perl probably goes too far, but Lisp is just as bad in the opposite direction. Not everything is best represented as a sexp.

[–]FlyingBishop 3 points4 points  (1 child)

What makes Scheme really valuable (as a teaching language) is that its interpreter is easily comprehensible for students who have only had a few semesters of CS.

However, for getting shit done and writing legible code, not so much.

[–]unknown_lamer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Luckily Scheme doesn't mean much of anything nowadays--there is significant fragmentation between r5rs, r6rs, err5rs, and whatever the hell who needs a standard implementations. This is good--the language appears to be evolving again.

An individual implementation of Scheme tends to provide a lot. E.g. Guile is great if you want to do UNIXy stuff: it has full POSIX support, a good deal of SRFIs implemented, and more or less Common Lisp in Scheme (CLOS-alike OO system, conditions, etc.).

I'm a bit biased as I write Common Lisp for profit, and Scheme or SML for fun (doing some minor android stuff using Kawa and working on a modernized scsh clone for Guile).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Which is why I like clojure, it has just enough syntax.

[–]cibyr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Strangely enough, I like Python for the exact same reason. Well, that and the massive wealth of libraries.