News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Homoiconicity isn’t the point (2012) by mattyw on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @09:29AM (#27037346)
> I think the reason Lisp self-asphyxiated is because people don't get it.

As programmer who has spent most time in Python/Java/C but has dabbled in a few lisp dialects but isn’t sure if I “get it”: how can I know if I “get it” or not?

Re:Homoiconicity isn’t the point (2012) by tluyben2 on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @10:00AM (#27037656)
It clicked for me only after getting significantly far in SICP back in the day, doing all the excersizes and creating things inspired by the book. Before that I just thought lispys were just some weird emacs thing. While this is a long time ago for me, I think it still will work for you to feel that 'click'.
Re:Homoiconicity isn’t the point (2012) by lmilcin on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @10:25AM (#27037920)
For me it clicked after I red Practical Common Lisp, ANSI Common Lisp and On Lisp, Let over Lambda and after I did couple projects in Common Lisp.

One day I looked at various REST API clients generated by JHipster. The clients generated for all languages had huge amount of boilerplate.

"Well, that's fair for ability to generate it from DSL", I thought to myself.

Then I looked at the code generated for Clojure client and it was many, many times smaller and looked as if somebody wrote it by hand. It was nice and neat.

Basically, the calls to APIs were macros and rather than generate a stack of code to be put in repository, the macros generated everything at runtime. The DSL was translated 1:1 to calls to macros and all the complexity of the generated code was completely hidden.

This caused me to spend considerable time thinking about the nature of difference between lisp and all those other languages and at some point it just clicked.

Re:Homoiconicity isn’t the point (2012) by rscho on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @10:00AM (#27037665)
Are you in love with Lisp? Then yes, you get it ;)