Lisp

What is so good about Lisp?

It seems rather unnatural

>>38
Are you fucking retarded?  I just want proper syntax that doesn't require shitloads of extraneous parentheses.  Surely that's not asking for too much!

>>41
Of course not, my liege!
($) :: (a -> b) -> a -> b
f $ x =  f x
(.) :: (b -> c) -> (a -> b) -> a -> c
f . g =  \ x -> f (g x)

>>42
I wouldn't trade mutability for syntax!

>>41
Try Applescript, then.

If it ain't Lisp, it's crap.

If it's Lisp, it's crappier.

If it's LISP, it's awesome. If it's Haskell, it's even better.

>>30
>>24-baka
>baka

GTFO.

>>29

I believe the terminology explanation went way beyond purism, though I comprehend the importance of settling right words for concepts in order to avoid confusion. The terms 'statement' and 'expression' were created for the same reason.

The text displays another misnomer. 'Macro' is another word representing at least two different concepts in programming. For example, C preprocessor function-like definitions are also called 'macros', and cannot be compared with Lisp macros.

>>48
No you, piece of shit-kun.

LOL SEXPRESSIONS

List has GC and GC is shit. Lisp is shit.