Talk:Lisp programming language
Alleged Paul Graham quote
The article previously claimed:
- More than anything else, I think it is the ability of Lisp programs to manipulate Lisp expressions that sets Lisp apart. And so no one who has not written a lot of macros is really in a position to compare Lisp to other languages. When I hear people complain about Lisp's parentheses, it sounds to my ears like someone saying: "I tried one of those bananas, which you say are so delicious. The white part was ok, but the yellow part was very tough and tasted awful."
While I see this on the Web in lots of places -- in exactly this form -- I can't find any evidence that Graham actually said it. It certainly sounds like him, but we need better sources than that. Crucially, I can't find it on his own Web site, where you'd certainly expect to see it if he wrote it. So I'm moving it here to give someone a chance to find any reliable source at all for the attribution. 121a0012 05:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
I removed the following. I cannot find any reliable source for the following:
- Q: How can you tell when you've reached Lisp Enlightenment?
A: The parentheses disappear.
- You are in a maze of twisty little parentheses, all alike.
- Anonymous on comp.lang.python in reference to Colossal Cave
- LISP stands for: Lots of Irrelevant Sets of Parentheses.
- Only Lisp gods are omnipotent.
- In an attempt on making a program language where you shorten everything and make it as small as possible, I suddenly found out that I'm only recreating Lisp without the parentheses.
- Lisp is an ideal preprocessor for the language of your choice; ECL is an awesome C preprocessor. I assume that ABCL also finally brings a decent preprocessor, and macros, to Java...
- An anonymous IRC user
Disturbingly, one putatively-reliable source for one of these gives this page as its only citation. Let's stamp out spurious "quotes"! 121a0012 05:19, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- There are no average Lisp programmers. We are the Priesthood. Offerings of incense or cash will do.
- Kenny Tilton, "Re: Comparing development effort : Lisp and functional languages versus Java.", Usenet article <3C2FCDF6.FB981BAD@nyc.rr.com> (2001-12-31)
Exiling this one until someone can come up with a reason this fellow should be considered notable. Feel free to delete after a week or so. 121a0012 05:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Just because we Lisp programmers are better than everyone else is no excuse for us to be arrogant.
- Erann Gat
- You seem (in my (humble) opinion (which doesn't mean much)) to be (or possibly could be) more of a Lisp programmer (but I could be (and probably am) wrong).
- kimos at bash.org
- 121a0012 05:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Common Lisp is politics, not art.
- Scott Fahlman 
- Lisp is the red pill.
- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp comp.lang.lisp archive
- We all know that Lisp is the best language around, but in the hands of most it becomes like that scene in Fantasia when Mickey Mouse gets the wand.
- Dino Dai Zovi, via Matasano Chargen
- I can't escape the sensation that I have already been thinking in Lisp all my programming career, but forcing the ideas into the constraints of bad languages, which explode those ideas into a bewildering array of details, most of which are workarounds for the language.
- Kaz Kylheku
- Programming in Lisp is like playing with the primordial forces of the universe. It feels like lightning between your fingertips. No other language even feels close.
- Glenn Ehrlich
- 121a0012 05:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- No [programming] language feels more natural than Lisp. There's a real sense that while Python was invented by a brilliant programmer, Lisp is built into of the structure of the Universe.
- Paul Rubin, comp.lang.python, 2003-10-18