Warp wrote:
>   In my little experience, trying to use a programming paradigm (eg. OOP)
> with a language which has no specific support for that paradigm (eg.
> traditional lisp or scheme, or C) only creates a ton of kludges.

Actually, LISP has excellent support for OO. It has closures (which are 
objects without the types, not unlike javascript objects) and it has macros 
that let you Do The Right Thing with the syntax and integrate it cleanly 
into the language. It's not going to look like Java/C++/C#/etc classes, but 
I'd disagree it's a kludge.

I don't remember scheme enough to know how clean it is, and I'll agree with 
you on the C part. :-)  And that's not to say there aren't things that would 
be very difficult to do in LISP without native support built into the 
language (like some forms of control flow, for example).

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message