In article <LAW2-F135ooXpvTjtPU0000b3c3 / hotmail.com>,
  "Ben Tilly" <ben_tilly / hotmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Wood <peter.wood / worldonline.dk> wrote:
> >
> >Ben Tilly writes:
> >  > I want to get some perspective on language design.  Some of
> >  > my initial impressions are available at:
> >
> >In your essay, you write:
> >
> [...]
> >What about Lisp?  Values are what is typed in Lisp, not variables or
> >operators.  You *can* declare for efficiency, but you don't have to.
> >Lisp has a type hierarchy where every object has more than one type.
> >You also write you have a math background.  So I'm surprised you
don't
> >mention Lisp.
>
> Mathematicians don't learn Lisp.  They learn things like
> Lesbegue integration.
>

Mathematicians will learn anything that might be useful to their work.
Some of them learn Lisp. Some of them learn topography. Some use Lisp to
study topography. (Some have probably used topography to study Lisp.)

Mathematicians who won't learn something based on apriori impressions is
not a mathematician, in my opinion.

-QM
--
Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of.


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/