News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Lisp-Flavored Programming Languages by mumblemumble on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @06:15PM (#21643721)
I would guess, based on the second and third sentences of the article, that the author agrees that this is the primary motivation:

> If you already love s-expressions then lisp-flavored languages will make it nicer when you need to build on existing platforms. In case the target language does not support advanced features like macros and REPL-driven development, these can often be easily added by using the s-expressions layer.

To the comment about "parenthesis-laden syntax", I find that, if I actually count the characters, my Java code tends to have just as many parens as my Clojure code. I suspect that there's just a tendency, if all you've ever known is algol-style syntax, to hyper-fixate on lparens that appear to the left of the function name. I think maybe the only programmers who get to criticize others for overuse of parenthesis are Forth, ML, and Haskell programmers.

Re:Lisp-Flavored Programming Languages by randallsquared on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @10:14PM (#21644953)
Actually, in my experience detractors tend to fixate on the

    ))))))))))
that ends some lispy code.
Re:Lisp-Flavored Programming Languages by madmulita on Wednesday November 27, 2019 @06:24AM (#21647008)
Yet are completely fine with things like:

                  }
                })
              ]}
            }])
          }
        }
      }
   }
Re:Lisp-Flavored Programming Languages by krapp on Wednesday November 27, 2019 @07:48PM (#21653734)
At the very least that is more readable due to the indents and the extra syntax. Depending on what language you're using, those different common groups of tokens do communicate context, whereas a dozen right-parens on a single line really don't.