Post #4405112

2026-05-10 04:06 UTC

@synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net I share your view about Python. When I'm forced to use Python, I always use the "typing" library. My ML-addled brain always seek types. You can't go wrong with picking up any or all of Racket, Scheme, Common Lisp, or Clojure. Clojure is the sensible choice for those who can't escape the JVM. I have always liked the LISP sexp syntax, since I was a uni kid, when I first encountered LISP. The benefits of the sexp syntax are well documented: parsability, homoiconicity, and so on. But most every programmer I've met detests LISP. They cite the lost-in-stupid-parentheses syntax as the reason why they hate LISP. The real, yet often unacknowledged, reason, though, is their inability to grasp FP. I've always maintained that the syntax of a language is irrelevant to language users, at least it ought to be, since it is the semantics that truly matters to their work. But we programmers, being who we are, always have emotional reactions to syntax. My advice to everyone is this: during the early phase of learning a new language, always check the syntactic passions.

Replies (3)

@vnikolov@ieji.de 2026-05-10 05:45

Syntax matters more than emotionally: Syntax affects how expressive a language is. Syntax affects editing and navigation capabilities (to illustrate, consider Emacs commands like `forward-list', `forward-sexp', `kill-backward-up-list', and then compare their usefulness between Lisp and Python). Syntax affects cultural compatibility, the significance of which is much more than emotional. Etc. #ComputerProgramming #ProgrammingLanguages @AmenZwa@mathstodon.xyz @synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net

Open ##4405114
@tpfto@mathstodon.xyz 2026-05-10 13:53

@AmenZwa@mathstodon.xyz "They cite the lost-in-stupid-parentheses syntax as the reason why they hate LISP. But the real, yet often unacknowledged, reason is their inability to grasp FP." - I'm told the kiddies these days refer to that as a "skill issue". ;D Admittedly, getting the hang of FP does not always come naturally (unless you already knew something like lambda calculus beforehand).

Open ##4405116
@contrapunctus@fe.disroot.org 2026-05-10 23:29

@AmenZwa@mathstodon.xyz @synlogic4242@social.vivaldi.net Why would the inability to grasp FP be an obstacle to learning Lisp? Both Common Lisp and Scheme are multi-paradigm languages, they also support OOP (among other paradigms) 🙂 Perversely, the “syntactic passions” are what have kept me from learning languages with a C-like syntax. I just like Lisp syntax (and its benefits - the consistency, the structural editing, the macros, …) that much… 😅

Open ##4405127