If a language lacks cons can it truly be held to be a lisp or has heresy taken over?

tkrn 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

Although I'm a recovering sexp addict I must confess that I fail to see what makes the cons cell so important to those purer in their faith?

To me the homoiconity of Lisp is mainly about code-as-data, the exact nature of the data doesn't matter to me that much as long as it's a first class citizen and enclosed in nicely balanced parenthesis (though sadly here Janet seems to have fallen to the temptations of the curly braces, and thus, is indeed heresy).

	▲	throwaway328 6 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I chuckled at "recovering sexp addict". What possible risk is there in over-indulging in sexp?! I simply don't see it. Speaking of unconventional lisps, I enjoyed this recently: https://github.com/vygr/ChrysaLisp/blob/master/docs/lisp/lis... from Chris Hinsley, author of the (very) cool Chrysalisp operating system. Same author who wrote this in 1995: http://www.uruk.org/emu/Taos.html
	▲	gorjusborg 6 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I am a heretic, but I agree that it seems the power of code as data can exist outside a linked list. I will not give up my curly braces or square brackets.

▲

exe34 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It's got Lots of Indented Silly Parentheses.