Should I learn LISP first, or learn LISP through SICP?
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 8:37
Lisp sucks. Read SICP and forget lisp like a bad dream. Start programming in real languages instead.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 8:44
SICP sucks. Learn LISP and forget SICP like a bad dream. Start programming in the only real language that is LISP.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 8:53
>>1
The latter, sort of. SICP teaches very little about Lisp, you would think that conses and linked lists are the only data structures available right up to chapter 5, when vectors are introduced to implement a VM. SICP is a general programming book, and it only expounds on Lisp as much as it's necessary to cover its materials.
In this case I guess it would be Anti-"Unix way", i.e. Anti-"tools that kind of suck but that are kept simple so they don't suck too bad"
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 15:05
Are we going to answer OP's question or just argue about if the languages are powerful.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 15:13
SICP is worth it. You also get a book about the syntactical details and features of the language you want to learn, if you want to use it professionally.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 15:24
SICP is a starter book for people exploring Computer Science.
It doesn't teach programming per se, but some principles and algorithms.
It does have some value for students, but it instills some inefficient and inferior practices with dependence on Scheme, that makes you a bad programmer(especially if you program "by the book").
I would advice taking the SICP abstractions with a grain of salt, and think of the lower-level code these abstractions run on. Providing these abstractions only for reference to learn CS topics does nothing wrong but in the real world there are many alternatives and optimized versions, some of which must be handmade for the program at hand.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-06 19:22
>>8
If Scheme was so good, can you name great piece of software (not necessarily SCALABLE ENTERPRISE APPS, as long as it is good usable software) written in Scheme? You can't. Because it's just a toy that no one uses anymore.
>>24
SICP has been deprecated a decade ago at MIT. It was a good book in the 80ies when computer where slow and had no graphic cards. The /prog/ spamming is just an elaborate troll for newbies. Don't fall for it.
I know I shouldn't tell him and just let him spend some months on an absolutely useless knowledge, but I'm getting tired of this joke.
Name:
Anonymous (OP)2013-07-07 7:33
>>26 Fuck. On /prog/ you never know who to believe. Thanks for help anyway.
>>26
I'm not sure if I understand your argument. Are you saying it isn't possible to do GPGPU computing using scheme?
>>27
Why would you believe anything you haven't experienced first hand?
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-07 8:30
>>28 Because I trust /prog/. Actually just because I'm a lazy fucktard who can't be bothered to read the book unless it's really worth it. I am learning LISP atm though.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-07 8:33
Your message was perhaps one of the strangest pieces of /prog/ postings I have ever received. Although it is flattering to have a ``fan club'', in fact, it is a very bad idea. Unlike most of human society, science and engineering are based on the idea that each of us is capable of evaluating evidence and thinking on our own. Each of us can do experiments, work out the reasoning, and determine the truth for ourselves. There is no room in science or engineering for ``fans'' representing group approval over individual thought. One of my heros, Galileo, put it very well:
In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.
I am pleased to talk with people about matters of science or engineering, so you and your colleagues may certainly send me mail. I hope to learn as much from your experiences as you may learn for me. But please get rid of the ``cult of personality'' way of thinking. It is unscientific and ultimately destructive.
>>30
It's fine having that reasoning when you study a single subject, but nobody has the time to apply such a thinking to every field in existence.
Humanity would be much better if the vox populi was interested in computer science, in physics, in the medical field etc.. and if everyone would decide not to confine their thoughts into a single field. That's not possible because of all the junktards who troll beyond common sense.
Basically, don't read SICP, and don't learn LISP unless you already have a comfortable amount of knowledge and have time to "waste" on brainf*cking.
>>35,37 /prog/ has an esoteric culture that you'll need to stick around for 2 years to understand. Also *pasta is imageboardese, we call it kopipe (コピペ) here. I'm going to guess you guys came from /q/ from the posts made by the imageboarders looking for intervention. Sage your posts to show politeness if you stick around.
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-07 15:02
>>39 (コピペ)
Take your retarded japshit somewhere else, weeaboo.
>>42
I can't go back to a place I've never been to, so the statement itself is logically false. Also, only LEL guy, Nikita, Mentifex and perhaps a few others don't sage, why do you want to be like them?
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-07 17:57
>>43
Sure, they are idiots. But I don't want to be like the French moron!
>>48
LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE
Name:
Anonymous2013-07-07 23:45
>>48
He's not funny actually. He's a pompous douche.