|
|
|
|
|
|
by nerdponx
2862 days ago
|
|
|
The main problem I had when learning CL was its standard library that at felt both enormous and strangely deficient in utilities for day-to-day work. CLHS is fine but the definitions can be obtuse, navigation isn't all that easy, and it's just a generally daunting approach to learning a language. There's a big gap between the code you learn in Practical Common Lisp and what you see if you open the source for any popular CL library. It's like Haskell, without the hype. The underlying paradigms aren't that terribly different, but the actual terminology for expressing ideas idiomatically is wildly different, and represents an unusual obstacle. |
|
|
Haskell uses a lot of terminology that's familiar to mathematicians, but unfamiliar to everyone else.
CL uses a lot of strange terminology, because it incorporated concepts before their names were standardized and used in other languages. You're left spending a lot of time trying to figure out that a wheel is called a frob or you just end up re-inventing the wheel even though the frob was already in the standard.