From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!134.222.94.5!npeer.kpnqwest.net!nreader1.kpnqwest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Promoting CL Was: What I want from my Common Lisp vendor and the Common Lisp community References: <3208226254834485@naggum.net> <867kvke4iz.fsf@gondolin.local.net> <3208254606019619@naggum.net> <1f4c5c5c.0108311044.2399e124@posting.google.com> <1f4c5c5c.0108312034.1b1e140a@posting.google.com> <1f4c5c5c.0109011022.72a56a2b@posting.google.com> <1f4c5c5c.0109012324.43d24c7@posting.google.com> <3208404998010473@naggum.net> <87itf1a2fh.fsf_-_@piracy.red-bean.com> <99fb3972.0109021504.bba92d0@posting.google.com> <3208475381413624@naggum.net> Mail-Copies-To: never From: Erik Naggum Message-ID: <3208511830109687@naggum.net> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 50 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 13:17:11 GMT X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@Norway.EU.net X-Trace: nreader1.kpnqwest.net 999523031 193.90.205.150 (Mon, 03 Sep 2001 15:17:11 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 15:17:11 MET DST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:15465 * John Foderaro > Your insistence that people knowledgeable about Common Lisp pretend that > the langauge has no flaws means you want us to appear to be stupid or > liars. Excuse the second followup to the same annoyingly untrue bullshit, but do you seriously think you communicate "flaws" in the _language_ when you do nothing more intelligent than call the three conditionals "bogus" and unconditionally call on people to avoid complex loop? Do you think anyone knowledgeable about Common Lisp will consider you the least bit intelligent or constructive when you claim that _that_ constitutes the "flaws" of the language? Come on! Pretending that your idiotic rant about if/when/unless/loop is somehow a useful contribution about the language on par with an intelligent, thoughtful analysis of problems is so self-serving as to make you look even more stupid than you did in the first place. That you _keep_ that idiotic document available on the Net is definitely _not_ to your credit. > If we Common Lispers don't admit to the problems in the language people > will as Java or C++ fans and they they'll hear a set of damaging and > likely untrue problems that will make Common Lisp seem worse than it > really is. And what, precisely, _are_ "the problems in the language" with respect to if/when/unless and loop? There is nothing more than _aesthetic_ whining in your rant. Loop has lots of _real_ problems, none of which you touch upon. The document you have posted on "lisp coding standards" is an insult to any thinking person and especially those who like Common Lisp, despite any wants and flaws. If I understand you correctly, you think that by preempting the Java/C++ crowd in denouncing Common Lisp as "flawed" for some fantastically stupid aesthetic reasons, you will make it look better that it would have been if the Java/C++ people were allowed to do it? Geez. How stupid is this? Who do you think will _fall_ for this fantastically irrational line of argument? > I look forward to seeing replies from you that are adult and thus don't > contain personal attacks against me or anyone else. Your passive-aggressive style of confrontation pisses me off more than anything else you do, John Foderaro. In fact, it makes you appear so far from sincere as you can possibly get. Your sincerity has been questioned by more people than myself, too. I no longer trust you in any capacity, neither your code nor your statements -- when push comes to shove and you really have to defend yourself or something you say, you are the most _dishonest_ person I have ever had the displeasure of dealing with, even topping Erann Gat. ///