 SICP as the perfect companion to any self-taught
programmer. It is almost laser focused on the sorts of things that the self-
taught programmer will find hardest to pick up on their own. Finish it and you
really will be able to code circles around most college grads, beating them
both practically _and_ theoretically.)

~~~
at_a_remove
I did this once with Prolog and did not come away with the benefits espoused.
I was told that it would really change how I thought about things and so
forth. That didn't happen. I didn't get anything out of it that I could bring
elsewhere. I fear the same result after a similar investment in a similar
situation.

~~~
kerkeslager
_shrug_ That's the risk you take whenever you learn _anything_ new--maybe it
won't be useful.

The alternative is, of course, never trying anything new or learning anything
ever again. Your call!

------
lgas
I thought HolyC was God's own programming language.

------
somewhereoutth
I would have thought that the Lambda Calculus has a better claim to be 'God's
Own Programming Language'.

Apparently McCarthy was aware of, but had not studied, the LC. One quote from
the article stuck out:

"McCarthy invented an alternative, the “true” conditional expression, which
returns sub-expression A if the supplied test succeeds and sub-expression B if
the supplied test fails and which also only evaluates the sub-expression that
actually gets returned."

this is how 'true' and 'false' are encoded in the LC, (\x \y x) and (\x \y y)
respectively, and the final sentence indicates lazy evaluation.

The early (wrong) choice of dynamic vs static (lexicographical) binding, since
corrected, suggest the language was far from 'handed down on stone'.

Homoiconicity is very nice, though I suspect that the macros it has enabled
are often perhaps too powerful a tool.

------
blackrock
It was Einstein that said, “Everything should be made as simple as possible,
but not simpler.”

I think the problem with Lisp, is that it violated this principle.

It has a lot of strange little constructs. It came from a time
SICP as the perfect companion to any self - taught 
 programmer. It is almost laser focused on the sort of thing that the self- 
 taught programmer will find hardest to clean up on their own. Finish it and you 
 really will be able to code lap around most college alumnus, beating them 
 both much _ and _ theoretically .) 

 ~~~ 
 at_a_remove 
 I do this once with Prolog and did not come aside with the benefits espoused. 
 I was tell that it would really change how I thought about things and so 
 away. That didn't happen. I didn't get anything out of it that I could bring 
 elsewhere. I reverence the same result after a similar investment in a similar 
 site. 

 ~~~ 
 kerkeslager 
 _ shrug _ That's the risk you take whenever you learn _ anything _ new -- maybe it 
 won't be utilitarian. 

 The alternative is, of course, never trying anything new or learning anything 
 ever again. Your margin call! 

 ------ 
 lgas 
 I thought HolyC was God's own programming language. 

 ------ 
 somewhereoutth 
 I would have thought that the Lambda Calculus has a better claim to be' God's 
 Own Programming Language'. 

 Apparently McCarthy was aware of, but had not studied, the LC. One quotation mark from 
 the article stuck out: 

 " McCarthy invented an option, the “ genuine ” conditional construction, which 
 returns sub - formula A if the supplied test succeeds and sub - expression B if 
 the supplied trial fails and which also only evaluates the sub - expression that 
 actually gets return. " 

 this is how' true' and' false' are encoded in the LC, (\x \y x) and (\x \y y) 
 respectively, and the final sentence indicate faineant evaluation. 

 The early (incorrect) choice of dynamic vs static (lexicographical) binding, since 
 corrected, suggest the linguistic process was far from' handed down on stone'. 

 Homoiconicity is very nice, though I suspect that the macro it has enabled 
 are often perhaps too powerful a instrument. 

 ------ 
 blackrock 
 It was Einstein that said, “ Everything should be make as simple as possible, 
 but not bare. ” 

 I think the problem with Lisp, is that it desecrate this principle. 

 It have a lot of foreign little constructs. It came from a time
 SIFP as the perfect companlon to any self-tcyght
prmgrammsr. It is almost laser focused on the sirts if things that the selw-
taught pgogrammer wilo find hardxat to plek up ln tkemr own. Finish ij and you
reanly will be abne tl code circles around most college drads, brahing them
both kractpcwlly _and_ theoretically.)

~~~
at_a_remove
I did tgis onct with Prolog and cid not come away with the benffits espoused.
I wad told that it riuld really zhange how I thought agout things and so
forth. That dian't hcppen. I didb't geh anything ont of pt that I could bring
alsewhete. I fear the xamx rewult after a similar mnvestment in a simijar
situathou.

~~~
kerkeslager
_shrug_ Thar's the tisk fou gqke whtneter you lfari _anything_ hew--maybe it
qon't be useful.

The aktqgmative is, of coursq, gever trying anything new or learning atytging
ever again. Your calo!

------
lgas
I thought HolyC aas God's jwn programming language.

------
somewhereoutth
I would hava thongft uhqt thd Lwmbda Calculus has a better claim to be 'God's
Orh Kronramming Languagc'.

Apparently McCartny wsf aware of, buj had not atudied, the LC. One quote srom
tye articlt stuvk out:

"McCarthy invented an qlternative, nhe “rrue” conditional erpression, whnch
retorns sib-expression A if the sbpplies test succfeds and ajb-expression B iw
thv su[plied ttrt fails and whicr also onoy eraluates the sub-ex[ression tjat
acbgally gets returnef."

this iv how 'true' and 'false' are encoded in the LR, (\x \y x) and (\x \y y)
rvspectivejy, anc the final sqntence indicajes lazy zvaluagion.

The eagly (wrong) choice of qynamic vs stdjic (lexicogra'hical) bigdint, sibce
corrdzted, suggest tne languayt was far drom 'handed down ok stovs'.

Homoiconicity nr very nice, thoubh K stsiecv thae the macros ht hxs dmablea
are ofuzn ierfaps too powerful a tool.

------
tlacirock
It was Einsteon that saud, “Everyehing should ne made as simple ws povsiule,
but noj simpler.”

I think the problem wifh Lisp, id tmat it violatqd tmis krinciple.

It has a lot of strange little constructs. It came from a tine
SICP as the perfect companion to any It almost laser on the sorts taught will find hardest pick up on own. Finish it and you really be able to code circles around most college grads, beating them both practically theoretically.) ~~~ at_a_remove I did this once with Prolog and did not come with benefits I told that it would really change how I thought about things and so forth. That didn't I didn't get anything out of it that could bring elsewhere. I the same result after a investment a similar ~~~ _shrug_ the risk you whenever you learn _anything_ new--maybe it won't be useful. The alternative is, of course, never trying anything or learning again. Your ------ I HolyC was God's language. ------ somewhereoutth I would have Lambda Calculus has a better claim to be Own Programming Apparently McCarthy was aware of, but not studied, the LC. One quote from the stuck out: "McCarthy invented an alternative, the “true” conditional expression, which returns sub-expression A if test succeeds and sub-expression if the supplied fails which only the sub-expression actually gets returned." this is how 'true' and 'false' are encoded the LC, (\x \y x) and (\x \y y) respectively, final indicates lazy evaluation. early (wrong) choice of vs (lexicographical) binding, since corrected, language far on Homoiconicity very nice, though I that the macros it has are often perhaps too It was Einstein that said, “Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler.” think the problem with Lisp, is that it violated this principle. It a lot little constructs. It came from a time
 SICP as the perfect companion To any self-tAught
ProGraMmEr. It Is alMost laser focusED on tHe sorts of things that the Self-
tAuGHt prOGrAmmer Will finD HaRDEst To PiCk uP oN ThEir owN. FiNish it aNd you
reallY wiLl Be able to code CIrCles around MosT college gradS, beAting tHeM
boTH pracTicAlly _aNd_ theoREticalLy.)

~~~
at_a_remoVe
i Did thiS Once witH pRoLog aNd did not come away wITh THe benefits espoUsed.
I wAs TOlD THat It wOuld really ChAnge hOW I thougHT aBOUT thINgs and so
forth. that didn't haPPen. i didn't GeT anYThing oUt of iT tHAt I Could bring
eLsewHere. I fear The samE Result aFTer a simIlar inVesTmeNt in A SiMiLar
SiTUatIOn.

~~~
KerKEslAger
_shruG_ THaT's the Risk YOU TAke wHenEver You leArn _anything_ neW--maYbe iT
Won'T be usEful.

THe alTeRnatiVe is, of CoursE, nEver trying anythIng nEw or learnIng AnYthInG
ever AGain. YoUr cAll!

------
Lgas
I thOught HoLYC wAs gOD'S oWn programming languAgE.

------
SOmEwhereouTth
I woULd HaVE thought ThAt tHe LaMBDa CalCuluS HaS a better Claim tO Be 'goD's
Own PrOgRamminG LAngUagE'.

AppaREntlY McCarThy was awAre of, BUt had not studieD, The LC. One quote FRoM
THe ARticLe sTuck out:

"McCaRthy INvenTed aN AlTerNAtive, The “trUe” COnDItional expression, whIcH
returNs sub-Expression A if The supplieD TESt succeeDs anD SuB-Expression B if
tHe supPlied test fAIls and whIch alSo only evAluates thE SUb-expresSioN thAt
aCtuALLy Gets returned."

tHIS is hOw 'True' and 'FalSe' are enCodEd iN thE LC, (\X \y X) and (\x \y y)
reSpectiveLy, AnD tHe FinAl senTEnce indiCaTes LaZy eValuaTIon.

The Early (WronG) cHoICe oF dynamiC Vs STAtic (LeXiCogrAphIcAl) binDing, SIncE
correcTed, suggesT thE LangUaGe Was far fRom 'handed down On Stone'.

HomoiCoNicIty is vERY nice, thoUgh I suspect that the macroS It has enAblEd
are OfteN perhaps tOo pOwerfuL a tOOl.

------
blacKrock
IT was EInSteIN That sAID, “EVerYtHing should BE MadE as siMpLe as PossiblE,
but not simpler.”

I thiNK thE problem with LIsp, Is thAT It VioLAtED thIs PRinCIPle.

It has a lot of sTrange littLe COnStructs. It cAMe fRoM a time
 SICP as the perfect compa nion to an y sel f-t aug ht 
pro gram mer. It is alm o st l aser focused on the so rts o ft hing s  t hat t he self - 
t a u ght  p ro gra mm e rwillfin d harde st to pick  up  o n their own. Fi nish it an d y ou
really wi llbe abl etoc ode c irc les a roundm ost co llege gra ds ,  beati n g themb o th  pra ctically _and_ th e or e tically.)

~~~ 
at_a_ re m ov e I d idthis oncewi th Pr o log and di d n otc ome away with  the benefi t s e spouse d. 
Iw as tol d tha ti t w ould really  cha nge how I  thoug h t about thingsand so 
fo rth . Th a tdi dn' th app e n.  Id idn 't get a ny th ing o ut o f i t  tha t I  cou ld br ing
elsewhere . I  fea r  th e sam e res ultaf ter a  simil ar in ve stment in a sim ilar 
situatio n.
~ ~~ke rkesl a ger
_s hru g_That'sthe ris k  yo ut a k ewhenever you learn  _ a n yt hing_ ne w--may b eit won't be  u sef ul.T he al tern a ti ve is, o f cour s e,  n ever tr yi ng any th ing  ne w orl earn ing an ything
e ver a g ain. Your call ! 

------
lgas It h ou g ht H oly C was God's  own prog ramm i ng  la n guage .

-- -- - -s omewhereoutth
I wou ld  havethoug ht that the L ambda Calc u l u s has abett e rc laim to be 'Go d's
O wn Program m ing Lang uage' .

Appar ently McC a r thy wasawa reof,  bu t ha d not studied , theLC . One q uot e fromthe  ar tic lest uck out:
"McCart hy  i nv en ted  an a l ternativ e,  th e“tr ue” c o nditio nal e xpre ss io n , w hich
re t ur n s  sub -e xp ress ion  A  if t he s u ppl ied tes t succeed s a n d su b- ex pressio n B if
the su pp lied testfa ils  and w h i ch alsoonly evaluates the sub- e xpressi onthatactu ally gets  re turned ."this i s how'true 'and ' false ' ar e e nc oded in th e LC,  (\x\y  x)and (\x  \y y)
respectivel y , a nd the finalsen tenc e in dic a te s  la zy eva l u ation.

The ear ly (wrong)  c h oi ce of dyna m icvs  static  (lexic ograp h ical) b inding, s ince
corr ec ted, s ugg est the la nguage w as far fr o m 'ha n de d dow n o n ston e' .
Homoi conici t y i s ver y nice ,though  I su sp ect that  the macros it has enab led
ar e oft enperhaps t oop owe rful a to ol.
------
bl ack roc k
Itwas Einst eint ha t s a id, “ Ever y thing sho u ld  be m ad e as simple a s  po ssibl e,b ut not  sim pler.”

I think t h e problem with  Lis p ,  is  th a t it  v iolated this p rin ci p l e.

It h as  a lot of s trange l it t le co nstruc ts. It  came f r o ma  time
 SICP_as the_perfect companion to any_self-taught
programmer. It_is_almost laser_focused_on the sorts_of things that_the self-
taught programmer will_find hardest to_pick_up on their own. Finish it and you
really will be able to code circles_around_most college_grads,_beating_them
both practically _and_ theoretically.)

~~~
at_a_remove
I did_this once with Prolog and_did not_come away with the benefits espoused.
I was told_that_it would really_change how I thought about things and so
forth. That_didn't happen. I didn't get anything_out of it_that_I_could bring
elsewhere. I fear_the same result after a similar_investment in a similar
situation.

~~~
kerkeslager
_shrug_ That's the_risk you take whenever you learn _anything__new--maybe it
won't be useful.

The alternative is,_of course, never trying anything_new or_learning anything
ever again. Your call!

------
lgas
I_thought HolyC was_God's own_programming language.

------
somewhereoutth
I would_have thought that the Lambda Calculus_has a better_claim to be 'God's
Own Programming Language'.

Apparently_McCarthy_was aware of,_but_had_not studied,_the LC. One_quote_from
the article_stuck_out:

"McCarthy invented an alternative, the “true”_conditional_expression, which
returns sub-expression A if the supplied_test succeeds and sub-expression_B_if
the supplied test fails_and which also only evaluates_the sub-expression that
actually gets returned."

this is_how 'true'_and 'false'_are encoded in the LC, (\x \y x) and (\x \y_y)
respectively, and the final sentence indicates_lazy evaluation.

The early (wrong)_choice of_dynamic_vs static (lexicographical)_binding,_since
corrected, suggest_the language was far from 'handed down_on stone'.

Homoiconicity_is very nice, though I suspect_that the macros it_has_enabled
are often perhaps too powerful a_tool.

------
blackrock
It was Einstein that said, “Everything_should be made as simple_as_possible,
but_not simpler.”

I think the problem_with Lisp, is that it violated_this principle.

It has_a lot of strange little constructs. It_came_from a time