Linked by MOS6510 on Wed 17th Apr 2013 21:20 UTC
General Development "You often hear about how important it is to write 'readable code'. Developers have pretty strong opinions about what makes code more readable. The more senior the developer, the stronger the opinion. But, have you ever stopped to think about what really makes code readable?"
Thread beginning with comment 558997
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Not sure I agree
by Kochise on Thu 18th Apr 2013 06:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure I agree"
Kochise
Member since:
2006-03-03

Try Erlang, never return back : functionnal as Lisp, close to the bare metal as C is (thanks to the <<binary>> format)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrIjfIjssLE
http://learnyousomeerlang.com/
http://www.tryerlang.org/

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Not sure I agree
by Neolander on Fri 19th Apr 2013 09:44 in reply to "RE[3]: Not sure I agree"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

So, I have tried the "Try Erlang" interactive shell's tutorials, then gotten into Learn You Some Erlang for Great Good, but at this point the language just seems too random for me.

While I like some core concepts like atoms, list comprehensions, or the message-passing concurrency model, what strikes me as annoying is the design of the language itself, such as the silent conversion of lists to strings, the brainf--k-like operator syntax, or the way comparisons of atoms with integers result in random results rather than exceptions.

Perhaps I'll try Erlang again if I need to at some point, but for now I'm rather going to look for a "cleaner" language to try out functional programming. Perhaps a Lisp dialect or Haskell can do the trick, since many people around here seem to like these.

Edited 2013-04-19 09:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Not sure I agree
by Kochise on Fri 19th Apr 2013 11:39 in reply to "RE[4]: Not sure I agree"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Then go for Scheme, which is a stripped down version of the original Lisp. Lisp as evolved into Common Lisp (Lisp with OOP features) yet there is not just a single implementation that is fully 'CL' compilant. Try those two :

http://ufasoft.com/lisp/ (Windows' logo, exe file) but you'll need several Visual Express 2010's dependencies since the Lisp IDE is Visual Studio based. About 4OO MB.

http://www.sbcl.org/ another pretty compliant and powerful, yet no IDE, you should use Slime + Emacs for the gurus. Or an Eclipse based plugin. Or WinSBCL from here http://code.google.com/p/winsbcl/ or LispIDE from there http://www.daansystems.com/lispide/

BTW, comparison between CL and Scheme : http://symbo1ics.com/blog/?p=729

Kochise

Edited 2013-04-19 11:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2