Subject: Re: newbie asks: why CL rather than scheme? From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 07:44:24 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Robert Strandh <firstname.lastname@example.org> | On the other hand, I think beginners today have a very clear (but wrong) | idea of what programming and programming languages ought to be like. | This makes them reject a priori anything that doesn't look like the | expectations. But a university should reject anyone who is unable to deal with facts that run counter to their expectations, indeed all of their old beliefs. If there is anything that is worth learning at a university, it is that bringing expectations to one's research and rejecting information that does not fit them is Wrong. In fact, few things you do can be worse if you really want to _learn_ something. The first place new knowledge that might topple old beliefs can be expected to be found is at universities, so if somebody enters a university expecting to have their existing knowledge confirmed, as opposed to turned inside out and completely revised, they have wrong expectations about what a university is for. | I secretly plan to take over that course and replace Scheme by Common | Lisp. I'll let you know what happened in a year or two. I look forward to it. I find your "reports from the field" informative, maybe particularly since they tend to confirm my belief that Scheme hurts students. :) /// -- The past is not more important than the future, despite what your culture has taught you. Your future observations, conclusions, and beliefs are more important to you than those in your past ever will be. The world is changing so fast the balance between the past and the future has shifted.