> This provides visual cues about scope and intention without first reading each token.
There isn't even a token to read in C. You have to infer what it is by parsing the thing in your head. Well, our visual systems have no problems doing this.
The C function definition doesn't have an operator which would help me to identify what it actually is.
float square ( float x )
{
float p ;
p = x * x ;
return ( p ) ;
}
Where in Lisp we have this operator based prefix syntax:
(defun square (x)
(* x x))
Oh, DEFUN, short for DEFine FUNction, it's a global definition and it defines a global function.
Or with types/classes:
(defmethod square ((x float))
(the float (* x x)))
Oh, DEFMETHOD, DEFine METHOD, so it's a global definition of a method (kind of a function).
The names and lists may not tell you much, but to a Lisp programmer it signals the operation and the structure of the code, based on typical code patterns.
Once we learned basic Lisp syntax this is the usual pattern for definitions:
<definition operator> <name of the thing to be defined> <parameters>
<body of definition>
Most definitions in Lisp follow that pattern. Function definitions extend/refine this:
<define function> <name of function> <parameter list>
<declarations>
<documentation>
<body of definition>
Code then has a layout which is always similar - since the layout is hardwired/ supported in editors and Lisp itself (via the pretty printer, which prints code to the terminal according to layout rules).
> block structures (if, while, try, etc.) are pretty much hard-wired into the language so they stay consistent
These are also hardwired in something like Common Lisp. But the general language is differently designed. Common Lisp has relatively few built-in basic syntactic forms (around 30) and the other syntax is implemented as macros.
> It's great if you are the lone reader: you can customize it to fit your head
Over the decades of Lisp usage a bunch of conventions and some language support for common syntactic patterns have emerged. It is considered good style to follow those patterns.
> But, other readers may not agree with your head's ideal model, or learning it adds to the learning curve of a new shop.
That's the same problem everywhere: the new control structure implemented as a Lisp macro is the new control structure in any other language implemented by a bunch of different tools (macros, preprocessor macros, embedded languages, external languages, a web of classes/methods, a C++ template, ...).
If you add a new abstraction, there is always a price to pay. In Lisp the new language abstraction often gets implemented as a new macro and may hide the the implementation behind a more convenient form.
C itself is not the pinnacle of programming languages in my opinion. JavaScript does require a "function" keyword (although it should be shortened to "func" in my opinion.)
It still stands that "}" indicates larger-scale structures than ")" in C-like languages. Lisp has nothing equivalent, and I find a visual way to identify forests versus trees without first reading text is quite helpful. Your eyes may vary; everyone's head works differently.
But as evidence people agree with me, lisp had roughly 60 years to try to catch on as mainstream. It didn't. Nothing had more opportunities. If you don't win any beauty contests after 60 years, it's time to admit you are probably ugly to the average judge.
> Your eyes may vary; everyone's head works differently
No, it's just training. You are just unfamiliar with Lisp code. After a few days training, you should have little problem reading Lisp code. It's like bicycle riding: people can't believe that it is possible to balance it, but after a few lessons it's no problem.
That's an old saying:
'Anyone could learn Lisp in one day, except that if they already knew Fortran, it would take three days.' (Marvin Minsky)
There isn't even a token to read in C. You have to infer what it is by parsing the thing in your head. Well, our visual systems have no problems doing this.
The C function definition doesn't have an operator which would help me to identify what it actually is.
Where in Lisp we have this operator based prefix syntax: Oh, DEFUN, short for DEFine FUNction, it's a global definition and it defines a global function.Or with types/classes:
Oh, DEFMETHOD, DEFine METHOD, so it's a global definition of a method (kind of a function).The names and lists may not tell you much, but to a Lisp programmer it signals the operation and the structure of the code, based on typical code patterns.
Once we learned basic Lisp syntax this is the usual pattern for definitions:
Most definitions in Lisp follow that pattern. Function definitions extend/refine this: Code then has a layout which is always similar - since the layout is hardwired/ supported in editors and Lisp itself (via the pretty printer, which prints code to the terminal according to layout rules).> block structures (if, while, try, etc.) are pretty much hard-wired into the language so they stay consistent
These are also hardwired in something like Common Lisp. But the general language is differently designed. Common Lisp has relatively few built-in basic syntactic forms (around 30) and the other syntax is implemented as macros.
> It's great if you are the lone reader: you can customize it to fit your head
Over the decades of Lisp usage a bunch of conventions and some language support for common syntactic patterns have emerged. It is considered good style to follow those patterns.
> But, other readers may not agree with your head's ideal model, or learning it adds to the learning curve of a new shop.
That's the same problem everywhere: the new control structure implemented as a Lisp macro is the new control structure in any other language implemented by a bunch of different tools (macros, preprocessor macros, embedded languages, external languages, a web of classes/methods, a C++ template, ...).
If you add a new abstraction, there is always a price to pay. In Lisp the new language abstraction often gets implemented as a new macro and may hide the the implementation behind a more convenient form.