Quote:Original post by SamLowry
Code can only be compared based on what it actually does, not on what it can potentially do. If you think otherwise, I present you with my own challenge:

(setf fruit '(apples oranges pears bananas))(format T "~{~A~%~}" fruit)

This Common Lisp code prints the names of the fruits, one per line. I ask of you to write me a C++ version of this.

Lisp is truly king :)

(setf fruit '(apples oranges pears women))

Quote:Original post by jdh30

Quote:Original post by SamLowry
Code can only be compared based on what it actually does, not on what it can potentially do. If you think otherwise, I present you with my own challenge:

(setf fruit '(apples oranges pears bananas))(format T "~{~A~%~}" fruit)

This Common Lisp code prints the names of the fruits, one per line. I ask of you to write me a C++ version of this.

Lisp is truly king :)

Lisp is fundamentally flawed. For example, the compiler fails to pick up on the following type error:

(setf fruit '(apples oranges pears women))

Cheers,
Jon.

(defmacro safe-setf (x y)  (if      (and       (eq 'fruit x)       (member 'women (cadr y)))      (error "Fruity type error! Only ripened ovaries of seed-bearing plants allowed in list")    `(setf ,x ,y)))

Quote:Original post by SamLowry
That's why I have developed this safer version of setf which has saved me countless times already:

(defmacro safe-setf (x y)
(if
(and
(eq 'fruit x)
(member 'women (cadr y)))
(error "Fruity type error! Only ripened ovaries of seed-bearing plants allowed in list")
`(setf ,x ,y)))


Anyway, it was certainly not my intention to start promoting Lisp in this thread (that would be Tron3k's or mr. Baum's job).