Hacker News Reader

Comment by benawabe896 | Hacker News Reader

Could we stop posting this please? It is a fantastic idea, but is incomplete and not worked on much at all.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7078660 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=900865 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1425203 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6843719 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2701414 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4112852

View on HN

Also when will people understand that SICP is not about teaching programming language? There is no fucking point in rewriting it in your favourite language, it is 99.9% your language less suitable for it (99% it already has mutable state, assignment, loops, (pseudo-)OOP and 5 layers of historic brain damage)

Don't know scheme? But it's even better that way! Many things will faster click in your head. Like oh wtf we're writing programs in some lists. Oh and now how the fuck your interpreter can evaluate programs far more complex than itself?

Scheme and/or Common LISP seem to be the common recommendation to embark on SICP journey, just for reference.

Especially scheme, because it's the language used in the original edition.

Look at Racket (was Dr Scheme) and use the dialect R5RS

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/939582/which-language-in-...

Use the SICP package for Racket, when you get to the chapters with non-standard functions. For example the chapter on streams and the one about the picture language.

http://planet.racket-lang.org/package-source/neil/sicp.plt/1...

An alternative to Racket would be Chicken Scheme. But again, anything that has R5RS included will do fine.

I would not go with R7RS, but this is just a personal preference. Seems bloated to me.

> it already has mutable state, assignment, loops, (pseudo-)OOP and 5 layers of historic brain damage

You mean like Scheme, right? It's got all that, plus an extra couple of layers now that there's R7RS.

Sure, but this is in Clojure. Surely that's not /that/ far away from Scheme: they're Lisp-1's with pervasive immutability. There's not such an emphasis on explicit recursion, but the loop/recur pattern is still pretty close :) (But yes, you would have to of course translate it from Scheme to Clojure, which means not doing the explicit recursion.)

The Heart wants what The Heart wants

Reply on news.ycombinator.com