[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?"
From: |
Emanuel Berg |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?" |
Date: |
Thu, 01 Aug 2013 22:28:44 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) |
"Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> writes:
> With lisp, you'd have at least to define a macro:
>
> (defmacro define ((fname &rest lambda-list) &body body) `(defun
> ,fname ,lambda-list ,@body))
>
> to be able to read and run:
>
> (define (f x) (if (= 0 x) 1 (* x (f (- x 1)))))
>
> in both emacs lisp, common lisp and scheme. Therefore here you
> could rightly argue that there's no scheme/common lisp, but two
> languages.
>
> But not for C/C++, I don't think so.
OK, if I made an effort to be as correct as possible, but still
ignoring details that shouldn't be allowed to mess up general
reasoning if they don't matter, I'd say:
- there is C (without classes etc.; i.e., without C++)
- there is C++ (*with* C, almost always).
So there *is* a C/C++, and that is C++!
--
Emanuel Berg - programmer (hire me! CV below)
computer projects: http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
internet activity: http://home.student.uu.se/embe8573
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", (continued)
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Óscar Fuentes, 2013/08/02
- RE: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Drew Adams, 2013/08/01
- Message not available
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Emanuel Berg, 2013/08/01
- Message not available
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Barry Margolin, 2013/08/01
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Rustom Mody, 2013/08/01
- Message not available
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Emanuel Berg, 2013/08/01
Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?", Pascal J. Bourguignon, 2013/08/01
- Re: Emacs history, and "Is Emacs difficult to learn?",
Emanuel Berg <=