Subject: Re: looking for a language with any of the following 4 charachteristics  (all 4 would be nice).
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 14:20:22 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Holger Schauer <>
| I wonder on what basis you draw the conclusion that the distinction is
| between verbal and visual and wonder even more about the possible
| implications.

  Sigh.  I wrote:

    It appears warranted by the various reactions people have posted and
    told of elsewhere to conclude that Common Lisp is a language that is
    better suited for those who are more verbal than visual in how they
    remember and learn.

| For instance, a verbal learner should not be thrown off by code like
| (member (car (list (do-something here (based on another complicated
| computation) ... <bunch of further arguments elided>)))).  This seems
| counterintuitive to me, I think even experienced Lisp programmers tend to
| have (reading) problems with such gross code. [1]

  On what basis do you conclude something about what a "verbal learner"
  should or should not be thrown off by?

| But then again, I may be one of those who you would classify as a
| visual oriented person

  Why do you think this is an either-or issue?  When I write "more verbal
  than visual" and try to be very clear that we are talking about a point
  on a line between two extrama, please do not waste my time by assuming
  that only the extrema are worth talking about.  Nobody is "classified" as
  a visual-oriented person, it is a matter of what you are more comfortable
  with, not some one-bit flag in your personality.

  In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none.
  In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief.