Comment by funcDropShadow
2 months ago
You mean such readable and understandable names like car, cdr, cadr, .... ? For the uninitiated, car is not about vehicles.
2 months ago
You mean such readable and understandable names like car, cdr, cadr, .... ? For the uninitiated, car is not about vehicles.
But you can use `first`, `rest`, etc. in new code. CL and Scheme are stuck with the old names for backward compatibility reasons going back over 60 years.
Clojure had a chance to do better because they were starting a new thing.
It's not necessarily a flaw with the language, in any case, just something I've noticed in Clojure articles.
I suppose I'm agreeing with the author - refactoring Clojure to make it more readable is a good idea.
> Clojure had a chance to do better because they were starting a new thing.
And it did. The seq abstraction is way more practical than the old-school list obsession in other Lisps. You get to treat collections uniformly while keeping the performance benefits of each implementation. Pretty smart move, honestly.
But sequences already existed in Common Lisp. The "list obsession in other Lisps" is largely people who don't actually use Lisp, IME.
1 reply →