Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Indeed, you are right about Scheme (and Arc). Thanks for the correction.


Sure, no problem. I guess Emacs Lisp falls under the old-and-broken category. And Picolisp eschews functions as a data-type by choice. Do you know whether Picolisp offers lexical scoping?


As the other response says. The FAQ provides some rationale & makes it clear you can, actually, build robust software with picolisp's model of scoping. My understanding is, ``dynamic scoping is faster for an interpreter'' and ``funarg is easy to avoid and closures are possible''.

See the three following points:

http://www.software-lab.de/doc/faq.html#dynamic

http://www.software-lab.de/doc/faq.html#problems

http://www.software-lab.de/doc/faq.html#closures


It offers something similar-but-not-quite called transient symbols: http://www.software-lab.de/doc/faq.html#problems

Alternative phrases for similar-but-not-quite: insidious, error-prone.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: