🚀 go-pugleaf

skrenta@amix.commodore.com (Rich Skrenta) writes:

   ... But given equal proficiency, could a
   programmer debug a similar algorithm implemented in Algol or Forth faster?
   How about C vs. Assembly?  Scheme vs. teco?

Debugging is an interesting problem. As far as lisp / its descendants go,
they have been well documented in the last two decades, so the answer is
out there in the literature. If you are really in a hurry for something,
a copy of Interactive Programming Environments, from Barstow, Shrobe and
Sandewall may be of some help.

   It's possible that the Magical Power of Lisp-like-languages outweighs the
   disadvantages of folding every syntactic construct onto the pattern f(a b c).

I don't know what you are trying to say. Could you be a bit more specific?

   I'm suspicious, though.  The Scheme crowds' arguments sound an awful lot
   like all of the excuses I heard for using Forth.

There is no "scheme crowd" making "excuses" for anything. Language is out there
for you to accept or reject. All one can ask is an enlightened response one way
or the other. I hope the bibliography just posted can help facilitate that. Btw
I will have a substantial collection of abstracts before long, in case that may
be more helpful.
 
enjoy.	oz
---
In seeking the unattainable, simplicity  |  Internet: oz@nexus.yorku.ca
only gets in the way. -- Alan J. Perlis  |  Uucp: utai/utzoo!yunexus!oz