Talk:Scheme (programming language): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Bpeel (talk | contribs)
Line 125:
 
Theres a statement in the wording that SCHEME is the easiest language of comparable power to implement. Is this REALLY true? I've seen some DAMN slim versions of Forth, and although it was never as fashionable for its stack-y ways, it was always a pretty expressive language and surprisingly capable for the kind of metaprogramming the lisps where known for. [[Special:Contributions/121.45.251.215|121.45.251.215]] ([[User talk:121.45.251.215|talk]]) 12:07, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 
== "Popular with programmers, implementors and hobbyists" ==
 
This sentence in the first paragraph seems completely meaningless: "Its compactness and elegance have made it popular with educators, language designers, programmers, implementors, and hobbyists."
 
Wouldn't it make sense to either simply state that "It is popular for its compactness", or to remove the overly broad and ambiguous "programmers, implementors, and hobbyists"? [[Special:Contributions/174.1.213.234|174.1.213.234]] ([[User talk:174.1.213.234|talk]]) 17:02, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 
== The Hofstaedter example ==