Re:Some thoughts on hylang (2017)
by foobar_ on Thursday March 21, 2019 @09:36AM
(#19452113)
I have not used CL. I was horrified by the loop macro infact because I jumped from C to CL.
I definitely made a stupid mistake of clubbing CL with scheme and clojure but in those languages they avoid these imperative features.
I have made other points as well which makes Hylang different from the rest.
1. Hylang is a transpiler. Don't compare it with other lisps. Sibilant and Liskell are others in the same league.
2. Hylang has more useful libraries than all the other lisps.
3. Right now, I find Hylang best suited to write good old imperative dirty scripts that get stuff done. If you have used Python, Ruby, Perl ... it's practically heaven.
4. I stress the imperative part again because ... because that's my stupidity of choice. I'm a scripting guy! I'm familiar with that stuff. The best part of lisp for me is not the macros. It's that I don't have to google for syntax that often and "-" beats the "_" for variable names.
I definitely made a stupid mistake of clubbing CL with scheme and clojure but in those languages they avoid these imperative features.
I have made other points as well which makes Hylang different from the rest.
1. Hylang is a transpiler. Don't compare it with other lisps. Sibilant and Liskell are others in the same league.
2. Hylang has more useful libraries than all the other lisps.
3. Right now, I find Hylang best suited to write good old imperative dirty scripts that get stuff done. If you have used Python, Ruby, Perl ... it's practically heaven.
4. I stress the imperative part again because ... because that's my stupidity of choice. I'm a scripting guy! I'm familiar with that stuff. The best part of lisp for me is not the macros. It's that I don't have to google for syntax that often and "-" beats the "_" for variable names.
5. ipdb works too!