Subject: Re: Common Lisp, the one true religion!
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:30:18 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

[ Please break your lines. ]

* Carl Gay <>
> This doesn't really have anything to do with parentheses, though
> s-expressions probably make it easier to deal with code as data than,
> say, messing around with abstract syntax trees.

  S-expressions are abstract syntax trees, for all practical purposes.

> Personally, I think the ability to treat code as data is overrated.  At
> least for the types of programming I tend to do.  It's certainly not
> essential in order to see the huge benefits Lisp can give you.

  I think the middle sentence is true.

> Some people have started referring to them as "syntax extensions", which
> may help prevent confusion by association with C-like "macros".
> Stressing the ability to do control-flow abstraction with them might also
> help.

  That would be a good thing for Scheme.  Common Lisp is not Scheme.

> Oddly, they don't seem to have the least aversion to scattering casts
> throughout their code...

  Huh?  And what is non-static about casts?