Re: Why Python When There Is Perl?

On 22 Mar 2024 01:43:02 GMT, rbowman wrote:

As I worked through the exercises I was mentally
calculating how I would do it in C.

C doesn’t put call frames on the heap, or even allow nested functions
(as standard), so I don’t know how you would handle closures.

If you want to talk about lexical oddities, there's the 73 stacked up
parens.

I keep them straight by indentation, e.g.

(defun convert-to-region-codes (beg end)
    "converts alphabetic characters in the selection to “region indicator symbols”."
    (interactive "*r")
    (unless (use-region-p)
        (ding)
        (keyboard-quit)
    ) ; unless
    (let
        (
            deactivate-mark
            (intext (delete-and-extract-region beg end))
            c
        )
        (dotimes (i (- end beg))
            (setq c (elt intext i))
            (cond
                ((and (>= c ?A) (<= c ?Z))
                    (setq c (+ (- c ?A) #x1F1E6))
                )
                ((and (>= c ?a) (<= c ?z))
                    (setq c (+ (- c ?a) #x1F1E6))
                )
            ) ; cond
            (insert-char c)
        ) ; dotimes
    ) ; let
) ; convert-to-region-codes

What makes this sort of idiosyncrasy worthwhile is a thing called
“homoiconicity”. It’s a pretty cool feature, though not obvious at
first sight.

I shouldn't be so snotty.

No problem. Your impressions are all too common among those new to
Lisp.

After all I used Forth back in the day and threaded interpreted
languages are a wonder to behold.

Now there is something that is nowadays only fit to be in a museum ...