Subject: Re: cautios question (about languages)
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 1999/07/30
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Joerg-Cyril Hoehle
| Do you intend to mean that CL programmers use less HOF (higher order
| functions) techniques than Schemers?  What about all Lispers fighting
| together for the case of LAMBDA against the evil C etc. crowd? :-)

  I'd say that Schemers use anonymous functions and higher-order functions
  because that's the only way their language really supports.  Lispers use
  these techniques when they are pragmatically superior to the large number
  of good alternatives.  likewise, Schemers use recursion whether it's the
  best solution or not, because that's what they have been taught is the
  only way.  Lispers use recursion when that is clearer than iteration, but
  at least they are aware of the cost if the function needs a value stack.

| Do you intend to mean that the style in CL is like in C where you don't
| pass much function pointers around, mostly primitive integers and
| constructed structs, except for the obvious sort() parameterization?

  have you read anything from Kent that indicates such nonsense, or are you
  just another scheming Schemer out to prove that Scheme is superior, when
  anyone who has seen an inferiority complex at work knows what's going on?

  in Common Lisp, we pass functions around all the time, but not usually
  _anonymous_ functions, and we don't use closures when we have structures
  and classes, and we don't generally call the value of function-returning
  functions right away because _more_ elegant means to do the same is
  available in CLOS.

| Or like in OO, where you mostly manipulate
| structs/records/objects/subjects as well?

  why do you have this very peculiar need to reduce Common Lisp to one
  paradigm?  have you understood exactly nothing of what Kent Pitman is
  writing about all the time?  Common Lisp is about allowing different
  cultures to co-exist, and lets us all borrow from the cultures we want.
  Scheme is not like that at all.  one reason I don't like Scheme is how
  Schemers don't like people who aren't exactly like them.

  bottom line is: Common Lisp lets smart, well-educated people think and
  then do whatever they think is best in any given case.  Scheme lets
  people do whatever smart, well-educated people once thought were best for
  all cases.
  suppose we blasted all politicians into space.
  would the SETI project find even one of them?