News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Lisp? by swuecho on Thursday May 07, 2015 @04:31PM (#9508073)
there is two sides.

probably, one evil thing is you have to deal with every other's abstraction and it will make you frustrated when there is a large codebase and a deadline.

Re:Why Lisp? by kazinator on Thursday May 07, 2015 @04:47PM (#9508182)
Let's see, what would I rather deal with.

* Another programmer's 15 function API, and a document on how to use it properly?

* Or another programmer's 15 function API, along with three macros which use the API properly, and capture all the scenarios I need based on a couple of examples.

Re:Why Lisp? by GFK_of_xmaspast on Thursday May 07, 2015 @05:47PM (#9508540)
How's this any different than taking a big ugly api and writing three shims around it to call it in the way you want?
Re:Why Lisp? by kazinator on Thursday May 07, 2015 @06:17PM (#9508738)
The difference isn't whether or not code is written; the question is who/what writes it:

- Does the machine write it, using a reliable syntax rule loaded into the compiler (implemented as a macro); or

- Does the programmer, by hand (or with textual preprocessing, copy and paste, IDE help, ...).

Macros can be as smart as you want them to be.

Re:Why Lisp? by swuecho on Thursday May 07, 2015 @06:14PM (#9508719)
generally, even bad api is easier to understand or debug than macro. and not all macros are well written.
Re:Why Lisp? by kazinator on Thursday May 07, 2015 @06:25PM (#9508771)
Macros being hard to debug may be true of some macro systems that you know.

Not all macros are well written is a poor argument; not all anything is well written ... so don't use anything!