From: walther@umbc.edu (Ms. Priscilla Walther)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Why Isn't Lisp a Mainstream Language?
Date: 26 Jan 1993 15:02:05 -0500
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
NNTP-Posting-Host: umbc4.umbc.edu

In article <C1FEH0.2yD@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu> hall@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu (Marty Hall) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.145226.16629@crd.ge.com> halverson@crd.ge.com 
>(Pete Halverson) writes:
>[...]
>>Personally, when I'm comparing languages, syntax is way down on my list.
>[...]
>>Why, then, do others make such an issue of Lisp's syntax? 
>
>One reason, in my experience, is the context in which they were introduced
>to LISP. I teach AI and AI Programming to MS students at Johns Hopkins. 
>Almost without exception, students who come into my classes with a smattering
>of LISP background (eg in an undergrad course) are biased against the syntax
>*from experience*. They were generally introduced by people who were not
>serious LISP programmers and in a context (an AI course) where understanding
>the language was not a priority. Few heard anything about LISP style or the
>importance of indentation or the ideas of functional programming. Not 
>everyone who takes the AI Programming course here turns into a LISP zealot, 
>but I do think it is fair to say that few are still troubled by the syntax.
>

>						- Marty


       
As a newcomer to the language, and a relative newcomer (undergrad) to
programming in general, from experience I can confirm, from a different
perspective, much of what you've said.

Since LISP _does_ have a repuatation for being hard to learn I did have
some concerns about the language.  On the other hand, during my
third semester programming course, I had a professor who, while teaching
our class (using Pascal), spoke so highly of Lisp, so often, that many of the 
students were intrigued by his praise for the language.  This has resulted in 
a couple of us taking a winter-session course to see what the language
has to offer, and I must say that I enjoy the language very much.  It's
so flexible and free from what I would call 'constraints', that I feel
very comfortable with it.  I have also found that, since the syntax is simple,
I am free to concentrate on the problem that I am trying to solve, rather
than syntax, type declarations, etc...

Concerning the matter of people feeling uncomfortable with the large
number of parens used, (referring to other posts -sorry for not including
them here), I didn't find that to be difficult since our version of EMACS
blinks the corresponding paren.  And lest anyone think that my being
comfortable with 'thinking in parens' might be due to a strong Math
background, let me just say that Comp. Sci. is my second major, 
my first major being Ancient Studies (Ancient History & Languages etc.) 
and until 18 months ago, I hadn't taken any Math for over 15 years.
(No flames intended, just an observation.)  What I _did_ find, is that
the parens required a precision of thought that was challenging, yet
gratifying.

As a final note, then, I would say, yes, in the beginning, my attitude
toward LISP was influenced by a professor whom I respected, and who spoke
positively regarding the language.  I would also say that being
'positively oriented' probably facilitated my ability to pick up the
language.  The question then, is, in comparison with C and Pascal
(remember, I'm giving you the newcomer's point of view, so I can't give
you a massive list :) of languages with which I have experience), which
language would I choose?  Without a doubt, LISP.  Too bad I have to
go back to writing in C and Pascal next week.  

        

    
-- 
Priscilla Walther
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp