top | item 4186129

Lisp Hackers: Peter Seibel

175 points| mark_h | 13 years ago |lisp-univ-etc.blogspot.com.au

16 comments

order
[+] spacemanaki|13 years ago|reply
I'd love a book on statistics for programmers written by Peter Seibel. I know there's Think Stats, and that's a pretty good book, but I'd be interested in a Lisper's take. PCL and Coders at Work are really great.
[+] mahmud|13 years ago|reply
what makes a lisper better at statistics teaching and exposition than a non-lisper? (say, a trained maths educator?)

fwiw, creators of R are Lisp weenies, so you might wanna look there more carefully :-)

[+] Graphon|13 years ago|reply
Funny - when looking at a codebase for the first time, I do almost exactly the same thing as described by Mr Seibel: I start rewriting it. I rename functions or methods that I think have poorly chosen names, I rename the names of fields, variables or parameters for the same reason, I refactor, restructure, and reformat the code to look like I think it should look, and so on.
[+] spacemanaki|13 years ago|reply
That sounds like it could be really beneficial to understanding a piece of code, but it seems like it would only ever be really feasible if you were working alone and taking some code from somewhere else and completely consuming it, into a new project like Toot and Whistle or into some other existing project. Most of the times that I've needed to ramp up understanding of some code is either at a new job or before contributing to some existing project.

Would you do this after starting at a new job, and make this your first commit? Or before contributing to open source?

I could envision some awkward social problems arising there. If you kept that code to yourself, but continued working on the old code, that would probably be frustrating.

I'm just curious because I'm really attracted to the idea of this method but am not sure if it would really work where I'd want it to.

[+] abecedarius|13 years ago|reply
Same here. Sometimes I come across code that's not easily improved that way, and not just because it's fragile -- this seems less rare than, say, 15 years ago. Does it seem that way to the rest of you? That things are getting better?
[+] abecedarius|13 years ago|reply
From time to time I imagine a language that lets you write constraints on your code in the language yourself — kind of like macros but instead of extending the syntax your compiler understands, they would allow you to extend the set of things you could say about your code that the compiler would then understand.

Auditors in E: http://www.erights.org/elang/kernel/auditors/

[+] AutoCorrect|13 years ago|reply
completely off topic, but when I started reading your comment, the 'inner voice' was C3PO...
[+] kinleyd|13 years ago|reply
Great interview. And thanks for the reference to 'Coders at Work'. Greatly enjoying reading it.