Every language and program is a subset of lisp.
Every language and program is a subset of lisp
Other urls found in this thread:
github.com
stallman.org
twitter.com
True. Lisp IS the most powerful programming language, after all.
can you write python inside of lisp?
Write a Lisp interpreter running on Malbolge inside Lisp then.
I've never seen a program written in Lisp. I've never needed to install Lisp on any of my GNU systems.
So are QUOTE,ATOM,EQ,CAR,CDR,CONS,COND,LAMBDA, andLABELrequired for a language to be a lisp or not?
I've seen people argue that clojure is not a lisp and one time even scheme.
Sure, because you can write a lisp in python
github.com
do you also use vim?
Python represents its objects as an AST which you have public access to. So the syntax of Python is essentially a wrapper over an obfuscated Lisp implementation.
Lisp is a subset of Java
(write "you're a faget\n")
>A shares some aspects with B hence A is a subset of B
this is you mind on lisp
you clearly don't understand what the fuck a full syntactic macro in a system that completely rewrite itself at runtime is bucko
You forgot your ()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()(()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()().
these functions and forms, with a possible exception of label or alternatives (such as pair instead of atom, or if instead of cond) are required for a lisp to be a lisp.
foo(bar(baz()))
(foo (bar (baz)))
thinking one of these is worse than the other is just bikeshedding
>I skimmed documentation of Python after people told me it was fundamentally similar to Lisp. My conclusion is that that is not so. `read', `eval', and `print' are all missing in Python.
stallman.org
It's not that one is worse than the other. It's that in lisp you can do both and in python you can do only one.
best-looking is baz().bar().foo() or currying
some lisp interpreters are superior to cpython, so there goes the preference
> thread full of people who think s-expressions and dynamic typing is the end-all of be-all
lol
you can write a Lisp macro that expands
(chain (baz) (bar) (foo)) to (foo (baz (baz))) pretty easily
All living organism are built out of bacteria. Bacteria > animals.
The paren enclosing the whole kills it, sorry.
>All living organism are built out of bacteria
no
Lisp is just a subset of my emacs
>Every language and program is a subset of binary.
python has lambda hence lisp is also a subset of python
check mate filthy atheist
>Every language user base is a subset of the python user base.
Wow lisp is so much better than python.
>I read a book about Java, and found it an elegant further development from C.
based and redpilled
This sentence alone has caused me to fully disregard everything Stallman says.
False. Emacs can not do everything lisp can do.
Yes, since Lisp has malleable macros, you can do anything.
All programming languages are exactly the same you absolute moron.
... with shit performance.
t. scriptnigger
Which dialect are you talking about? Are you aware that not all of them are interpreted?
or just
(-> (foo)
bar
baz)
Obligatory
At least until Jai comes out in 2143.
Bacteria are not Eukaryotes you fucking idiot
I didn't get the lisp reference.
>nobody understands what the fuck you do or how you work
>all they see is moonrunes
>they have so little understanding that they view you as a retarded horse riding a retarded unarmoured peasant
>they acknowledge that you get results, but they still don't know what they're looking at
it's a story as old as time, viewing people speaking a language that you don't understand as uncultured retarded barbarians that can barely survive
Lambda Calculus is a subset of Haskell.
DOS was made using LISP. Anybody who says otherwise needs to study their computer history some more.
Bold
What does that have to do with set theory subsets?
That's explains why even microsoft thought it was shit
Sounds like Jon Blow is probably going to delay it again. Looks like we'll be waiting until 2144 now.
Can we do things like (quote var) in python?
I mean for logging stuff, like
def print_var(var):
var_string = name_of_variable_to_string(var)
print(var_string + " has value" + var)
>solve everything in single LINQ query
this is me desu
You can build any language above a language that's Turing Complete, so yeah.
Not sure, but I don't think you can introspect a variable's name unless you kinda know it already. At least not in a generic way.
Okay, write a compiler in a Turing Tarpit like Malbolge, then tell me that again.
In MATLAB I recall constructing strings and then evaluating them.
I don't recall the syntax but in pseudo code:
print("the value of " + string_var + " is " + eval(string_var))
Then later on I read SICP I found out this practice is actually called meta programming. Lisp generating lisp code to be evaluated by lisp.
In python I did this in several passes.
First pass: I write to a file.
Second pass: I run the file written in the first pass.
But this is dirty.
thank you!
maybe something like (define foo (cons 'horse (cons 'princess 'knight)))
(car (cdr foo)) ?
I don't know.
>(car (cdr foo))
>not (cadr foo)
you still have ways to go
>can you write python inside of lisp?
You could but why would you use Lisp to write in an inferior language?
Can you properly pronounce cadddr?
I mean, there's better ways in Python, employing dictionaries. But for generic variables, you could only work via the dir() command, so you'd write a short function like:
print_variable("foo")
def print_variable(var):
print(f"Variable {var} is {dir()[var]}")
Or something along those lines..
yes
desu I don't like this syntactic sugar and I only use scheme for recreational programming.
So "the car of the cdr" makes more sense to me