Content deleted Content added
Pi Delport (talk | contribs) →Don't start with Lisp: comment |
Pi Delport (talk | contribs) →Don't start with Lisp: remember to mention Wikibooks |
||
Line 4:
:This will probably be a controversial suggestion as Lisp advocates will argue that the language is directly rooted in lambda calculus. Still, I think it is a good idea. I would suggest using Eiffel for such intro examples because it's an imperative language, close to what most people use, and yet the syntax is very clear and the notion of agent directly represents the mathematical concept of closure. I am willing to do it but I will wait to see if there is some agreement. [[User:Necklace|Necklace]] 22:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
:: It's important to remember here that [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information|Wikipedia is not a textbook or tutorial]], but an encyclopedia: the goal is not to ''teach'' (that's what [[Wikibooks]] is for), but to ''describe'', with accuracy and relevance. When it comes to the choice of example language, it's not industrial popularity that's relevant, but things like historical prominence, and how well it's represented in the literature.
:: With all that in mind, i think [[Lisp programming language|Lisp]] is an ideal choice; probably the only change called for is to switch the examples to the [[Scheme programming language|Scheme]] dialect, because of its simpler syntax, and because of the important role it played in popularizing the concept of closures to begin with. (If a non-Lispy example is desired for contrast, a member of the [[ML programming language|ML]] family is probably appropriate.) --[[User:Piet Delport|Piet Delport]] 21:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
| |||