by homoiconic I don't mean lisp, it's too explicit/anal about structure in same way java is too e/a about class/type declarations #infermore
@refaktor for me it's much more limiting to not be able to map over any num. of seqs in step (at once) & having to explicitly pass defaults.
-
-
@sbelak well, I see we are then back at what is bigger benefit/tradeoff to whom, or limits his/her style of usage#corrected -
@refaktor also macros allow lisp to have it both ways. Clojure is a good example of this, requiring significantly less ()s than CL. -
@sbelak macros also benefit from explicit structure, I agree, but I also have an opinion on macros you would not like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.