Re: [dev] lisp

From: Andrew Gwozdziewycz <>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 08:14:07 -0400

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Louis-Guillaume Gagnon <> wrote:

> 2013/6/29 Andrew Gwozdziewycz <>:
> > I don't speak for the suckless community, but despite the fact that I
> love
> > it, Lisp is complicated and not very simple at all
> It's worth noting that the R5RS scheme standard is only ~50 pages
> long:
> In comparison, the C99 standard is ~550 pages. I would say that the
> scheme dialect is pretty simple.
50 pages of spec does not a simple dialect make. Sure, it defines a tiny
but it demands fully hygienic macros (recommending `syntax-rules`) and

`syntax-rules` macros don't allow you to capture bindings at all, which is
impractical enough that R6RS (and many implementations) adopted
(and subsequently implemented `syntax-rules` in terms of it), which is just
painful and complex to use. `syntax-rules` macros, while declarative and
more maintainable, is actually it's own language, and breaks you out of the
"Scheme" flow.

Don't even get me started on the "simplicity" of continuations. There's a
of literature on them which refutes that.

Received on Sun Jun 30 2013 - 14:14:07 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Jun 30 2013 - 14:24:04 CEST