• Shareni
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Common Lisp on the other hand is more of a 1980s language where you can use a functional style some of the time, and with some pain.

    Isn’t the main issue with it that you’re not forced to be functional? It’s supposed to be pretty good at it with the correct libraries.

    Either way, you’d start by reading SICP

    You really don’t want OP to learn lis

    • solrize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Isn’t the main issue with it that you’re not forced to be functional? It’s supposed to be pretty good at it with the correct libraries.

      I’d say CL’s main issue is that it’s anachronistic by now, and when used idiomatically it’s an imperative language (think of LOOP). You can use some functional idioms in it, but it gets painful to do so.

      Look at the article “Why Functional Programming Matters” and imagine rewriting the code examples in Scheme (confusing but straightforward) and then in CL (ouch).