Mathematically speaking, a language with a proper syntax can parse to valid Lisp and the other way around. Insisting on solely using something that should be parser output, not input, is a mark of stupidity.
>>1
His 'retorts' are quite retarded, every retort could be summed up as "Wrong! Lisps notation is ugly!" while not giving any real proof that it is ugly and not just unusual.
If Lisp was really unreadable, slow, harmful, old and busted then why do Lispers exist, why do newer programming languages (and C++, and Java) take features from it, why are Scheme/CL implementations actively developed, and why do new pseudo-Lisps pop out of nowhere (note: this is bad)?
>>29
On the internet, mostly because of ad hominem attacks like yours.
Name:
Anonymous2011-07-26 12:48
>>28 If Lisp was really unreadable, slow, harmful, old and busted then [..] why do newer programming languages (and C++, and Java) take features from it?
If rain is unpleasantly wet then why do people use umbrellas?
Name:
Anonymous2011-07-26 13:08
S-expressions are clearly superior to XML. Anyone who thinks otherwise is being silly.
Name:
Anonymous2011-07-26 14:48
>>33
Closing tags make code more readable. Prove me wrong.
closing tags are only useful if they're really far apart, as in text markup. XML is rarely used for text markup. Usually the tags end very close to where they begin.
In the case that they are far apart, comments can be used. Forcing comments is a bad idea.
Indentation is more important anyway. It gets the same thing across without adding noise.
>>35
XML is designed as a data interchange format:
1. to markup data in a hierarchical structure
2. that is potentially human readable and changeable
3. that is platform and architecture neutral
4. that is easily parsed in software
S-exp was deemed not quite suitable for point 2, otherwise people would have designed a S-exp language as an interchange format at the time XML was designed. The designers of XML were inspired by the existing SGML standard as it achieved most of their objectives.
>>37
Men weren't given a strong, consistent and positive male role model in their childhood and women became frustrated with their interactions with men at various stages of their life.
Name:
Anonymous2011-07-26 19:40
>>38 Men weren't given a strong, consistent and positive male role model in their childhood and women became frustrated with their interactions with men at various stages of their life.
Agreed. That is why Islam countries don't have homosexuals. It's the degradation of the western word, that spawns them. Greeks and Romans had similiar experience, before their demise.
>>39
You better believe that Islamic countries have homosexuals, they just happen to be repressed by their culture. It appears that there are movements to remove the stigma against homosexuality in their nations.
Also, you'll find the Hasidic Jewish community and Amish Pennsylvanian community are two social communities with the low occurrence of gay men. Apparently, the fathers here provide a proper masculine role model for their sons.