From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-13 16:59:09
on Fri Jul 13 2007, Mathias Gaunard <mathias.gaunard-AT-etu.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote:
>> And I found that this felt like a natural way to define pairs.
> It's the natural lisp way.
Well, one of Lisp's limitations is its syntactic uniformity. You get
no visual clues from looking the symbols that make up a program about
what that program means. Curiously, Lispers often tout this
uniformity as an expressivity *advantage*, one that I just don't see.
For maximum expressivity, I want lots of syntactic flexibility.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com The Astoria Seminar ==> http://www.astoriaseminar.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk