Re:Lisp: it's not about macros, it's about READ (2012)
by wtetzner on Monday July 18, 2016 @11:12AM
(#12115503)
Yes, that's true, but they were saying they wanted macros in non-lisp languages. I gave an example of a non-lisp language that has lisp-like macros.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Lisp: it's not about macros, it's about READ (2012)
by eggy on Monday July 18, 2016 @05:42PM
(#12118221)
Granted. I guess it boils down to degree of 'Lisp-like' when talking macros. Another article on HN today about Racket, Template Haskell and macros. I think the whole idea is that Haskell doesn't really need them, since it has other ways of achieving similar ends thereby making TH macros a bad fit for Haskell.
I like Elixir a lot, but I have the luxury of not depending on coding for a living, so I am learning LFE because I like how it is as much a Lisp as it can be when constrained by the BEAM. Truthfully, I could stay away from all of the distributed languages like Erlang, Elixir, LFE, Pony and others, since I don't really have a use for them (yet - looking at ABM Agent-Based Modeling).
But I keep at LFE by trying to duplicate the book 'The Handbook of Neuroevolution Through Erlang'. There are at least a couple of other people who have started it in LFE and the other in Elixir. A good fit for ANNs.
Re:Lisp: it's not about macros, it's about READ (2012)
by wtbob on Monday July 18, 2016 @07:26PM
(#12118584)
> they were saying they wanted macros in non-lisp languages.
He; I don't have multiple personalities
Re:Lisp: it's not about macros, it's about READ (2012)
by wtetzner on Tuesday July 19, 2016 @11:11AM
(#12122215)
Yes, I didn't mean to suggest you do :)
I was using the singular they: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they