🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ADRIANHO.91Jun14213017@barkley.berkeley.edu> adrianho@barkley.berkeley.edu (Adrian J Ho) writes:
>>			Scheme seems to share much of its syntax with
>>Lisp, which tends to be a "write only" language.

>Hardly true of Scheme/Lisp.  The only language that might be truly
>said to possess this characteristic is APL, and only because of its
>infernal character set.  (Because of this, APL is the one language
>I've encountered in my life that I've never _wanted_ to master.)
>Substituting each APL operator with a descriptive name would certainly
>go a long way towards making it less of a "write-only" language.

Actually, FORTH is also an extremely write-only language.  I also find
that Lisp is somewhat write-only when complex programs are programmed
in a funcational style.

I suspect that languages are write-only more because they lack names for 
local variables or intermediate results that because they have unusual
characters representing functions.  I mean, who would want to write
out "iota" or "rho" every time you wanted an array? :-) :-)

Food for thought, so your brain doesn't starve...
	     -- Darren
-- 
--- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware ---
----- Network Protocols, Graphics, Programming Languages, FDTs -----
+=+ Nails work better than screws, when both are driven with hammers +=+