Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This was a great read. My favorite part was the section about rarely used language features, as I have had a similar experience. It makes you wonder if you're inexperienced or doing something wrong, when in fact those features may just not be needed most of the time.



Having talked to a bunch of very experienced LISPers recently (including Richard Gabriel) about this very topic, it appears to be the case that most people go wild with macros for a little while, but this passes and then you write fairly straightforward code.


I've written CL macros. I've noticed that for me, the probability of long-term use seems proportional to the size of a macro's implementation. The more work a macro does, the less likely I'm to revert to "straightforward code".


There is no single answer for that. Some code from experienced Lisp developers uses a lot of macros. Others don't like that style. It also depends on what you are writing.


Most of the macros you'll need are already part of clojure core, thankfully


Well, those feature are needed, but good people already made use of them. The "go" macro from core.async is a good example.


can be said about C++ (or any language). But he (the author) said it much better.


(sorry YOU said it much better.. )




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

Search: