ECMAScript真的是Lisp的一种方言吗？ [英] Is ECMAScript really a dialect of Lisp?

问题描述

我的一位朋友提请我注意第四届欧洲Lisp研讨会的欢迎辞：

A friend of mine drew my attention the welcome message of 4th European Lisp Symposium:

...实现和应用
任何Lisp方言，包括
Common Lisp，Scheme，Emacs Lisp ，
AutoLisp，ISLISP，Dylan，Clojure，
ACL2， ECMAScript ，...

然后询问ECMAScript是否真的是Lisp的方言。真的可以这样考虑吗？为什么？

and then asked if ECMAScript is really a dialect of Lisp. Can it really be considered so? Why?

是否有一套明确且明确的标准来帮助我们检测语言是否是Lisp的方言？或者是一种非常松散的方言（在这种情况下，我们可以将Python，Perl，Haskell等添加到Lisp方言列表中吗？）

Is there a well defined and clear-cut set of criteria to help us detect whether a language is a dialect of Lisp? Or is being a dialect taken in a very loose sense (and in that case can we add Python, Perl, Haskell, etc. to the list of Lisp dialects?)

推荐答案

Brendan Eich想为Netscape做一个类似Scheme的语言，但是现实干预了，他最终不得不做一些像看起来一样的东西，就像C和Java一样对于正常的人，但工作就像一种函数式语言。

Brendan Eich wanted to do a Scheme-like language for Netscape, but reality intervened and he ended up having to make do with something that looked vaguely like C and Java for "normal" people, but which worked like a functional language.

我个人认为调用ECMAScriptLisp是不必要的。但每一个他自己。关于真正的Lisp的关键似乎是数据结构符号和代码符号相同的特性，而且ECMAScript（或者Ruby或Python或任何其他不 Lisp的动态函数语言）都不是这样。 。

Personally I think it's an unnecessary stretch to call ECMAScript "Lisp", but to each his own. The key thing about a real Lisp seems like the characteristic that data structure notation and code notation are the same, and that's not true about ECMAScript (or Ruby or Python or any other dynamic functional language that's not Lisp).

警告：我没有Lisp凭证： - ）

Caveat: I have no Lisp credentials :-)

这篇关于ECMAScript真的是Lisp的一种方言吗？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！