> So what's the explanation for that?
Why, they are impractical buffoons who lack the benefit of my own vast personal experience, which trumps everything. Or else blind zealots.
Why, they are impractical buffoons who lack the benefit of my own vast personal experience, which trumps everything. Or else blind zealots.
1. Parentheses are inconvenient.
2. Everything you can do in Lisp you can do in $other_turing_complete_language.
What you're missing in (1) is that as much as you wish you were stating an objective truth of the universe, you're really just stating your own subjective impression. If parentheses were objectively, universally inconvenient, nobody would ever program in Lisp. And yet many do. So what's the explanation for that?
What you're missing in (2) is that although (2) is certainly true, it's irrelevant. If (2) were relevant, nobody would ever prefer any Turing-equivalent language over another. And yet objectively, people certainly do. So what's the explanation for that?
The other thing you're missing in (2) is Greenspun's tenth rule, but I'll let you look that up.