Some groups (in Google) have a special omnipresent header message that
tells newbies what to read before posting there. This is (I think) hard
to do in general because that is (I think) specific to Google groups.
But we could easily have a weekly reminder post with the subject NEW
LISPERS PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING IN C.L.L. which would be a sort
of abbreviated FAQ composed of pointers to existing conversations.
Obvious examples include:
* I'm a complete novice. Where do I begin? ...
* Why there are so many parens? Or: I want to propose a new syntax with
less parens! First, read this thread: ...
* How are lisp, python, ruby, forth related? Read this thread: ...
* I'm confused by there being so many imlpementations. Which one should
I use? ...
* Isn't Lisp slow? Read this thread: ...
* I don't get macros! Read this thread: ...
Even if a newbie manages to miss this weekly reminder, we could just
point people to the latest such post instead of having to answer all
these all the time.
If y'all think that this is a good idea, I'll volunteer to collect up
the pointers and be the weekly den mother.
·········@gmail.com" <········@gmail.com> writes:
> If y'all think that this is a good idea, I'll volunteer to collect up
> the pointers and be the weekly den mother.
I like it. Good luck!
········@gmail.com wrote:
> Some groups (in Google) have a special omnipresent header message that
> tells newbies what to read before posting there. This is (I think) hard
> to do in general because that is (I think) specific to Google groups.
> But we could easily have a weekly reminder post with the subject NEW
> LISPERS PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING IN C.L.L. which would be a sort
> of abbreviated FAQ composed of pointers to existing conversations.
> Obvious examples include:
>
> * I'm a complete novice. Where do I begin? ...
Google, fool!
>
> * Why there are so many parens? Or: I want to propose a new syntax with
> less parens! First, read this thread: ...
>
> * How are lisp, python, ruby, forth related? Read this thread: ...
>
> * I'm confused by there being so many imlpementations. Which one should
> I use? ...
>
> * Isn't Lisp slow? Read this thread: ...
>
> * I don't get macros! Read this thread: ...
>
> Even if a newbie manages to miss this weekly reminder, we could just
> point people to the latest such post instead of having to answer all
> these all the time.
>
> If y'all think that this is a good idea,
Get back to your cyanobacteria. That is the most anti-social idea I ever
heard and runs entirely against the communal spirit of comp.lang.lisp.
Ron had it wrong, Lispniks are thoroughly sociable. Look at all the
drinking clubs--er, user groups. We love noobs and giving them personal
attention and/or abuse. They get custom instruction (not prepackaged
one-answer-serves-all-(not!) Hal9000-speak) and a warm fuzzy from direct
interaction with the Lisp gods, even when we Barkley them into the cheap
seats.* I am trying to imagine a Nodstrum clerk responding to a question
by telling a customer where to find the store directory.... ain't
happenin for me.
Some of us remember the day when we /never/ saw an article beginning
"Hi, I am just learning Lisp and...". A dumb question is not an
aggravation, it is where noobs start and where we start to get to know a
noob. Spank them and send them off to a fifty-link page to study up
before daring to address We Special Ones and do not expect them to come
back.
kt
* During a basketball game in the Barcelona Olympics, massive power
forward Charles Barkley almost floored 168-pound Herlander Fernandes
Coimbra with an elbow to the chest. "Somebody hits me, I'm gonna hit him
back," Barkley declared, "even if it does look like he hasn't eaten in a
while!" Coimbra was thrilled. Barkely had always been his hero, and
later told Barkley, �You made me a big star in my country.�
k
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
Ken Tilton wrote:
> A dumb question is not an
> aggravation, it is where noobs start and where we start to get to know a
> noob. Spank them and send them off to a fifty-link page to study up
> before daring to address We Special Ones and do not expect them to come
> back.
A fair point (two points, actually). But the question is not so much
whether we would like to have such a thing as whether the noobs would
like to have such a thing. When I'm about to post something list that I
haven't been following for a while, I think that I would appreciate an
abbreviated FAQ of the sort proposed. Are there any noobs in the house
who would like to chime in on this?
> abbreviated FAQ of the sort proposed. Are there any noobs in the house
> who would like to chime in on this?
OK...
I've been lurking here for about 2 months now and have been working
through books and consulting the HyperSpec as well as archives of this
group. So far I've found that most of my problems are answered with a
little bit of research.
I think it's a fine balance: showing people that it can be fun to solve
a problem on your own but appreciating that it's not fun to be stuck on
something that could easily be answered by a FAQ entry. So I think your
efforts would be appreciated. And in the meantime, I have some
questions brewing so I can still amuse those who like to
toast-the-newbies.
Phil
········@gmail.com wrote:
> A fair point (two points, actually). But the question is not so much
> whether we would like to have such a thing as whether the noobs would
> like to have such a thing. When I'm about to post something list that I
> haven't been following for a while, I think that I would appreciate an
> abbreviated FAQ of the sort proposed. Are there any noobs in the house
> who would like to chime in on this?
I am one, and frankly I found a lot of Lisp resources just by Googling.
Paul Graham's, Peter Seibel's, and David Lamkins' books are easily
found as well. I even found the whole lecture on Lisp, can't remember
the URL though. When I asked a question the fine people in this ng also
gave me more links and useful materials, so as a noob personally I
don't find information about Lisp scarce or difficult to find.
So if you put effort and time for putting out the FAQ, I believe other
noobs and I will be grateful, but if not, IMHO it's OK too :)
Ray
········@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Tilton wrote:
>> A dumb question is not an
>> aggravation, it is where noobs start and where we start to get to know a
>> noob. Spank them and send them off to a fifty-link page to study up
>> before daring to address We Special Ones and do not expect them to come
>> back.
>
> A fair point (two points, actually). But the question is not so much
> whether we would like to have such a thing as whether the noobs would
> like to have such a thing. When I'm about to post something list that I
> haven't been following for a while, I think that I would appreciate an
> abbreviated FAQ of the sort proposed. Are there any noobs in the house
> who would like to chime in on this?
>
Well, a reminder is definitly worthful, but it's more helpful to have
fewer up-to-date, well-maintained and well-known resources then another
one-person effort. Time is money, and I think it's better spent to help
one of the previously mentioned projects.
I want to note that the regulars on this list are far less often
referring to FAQs or existing resources than for instance people on
c.l.c++. Even with a remainder FAQs mainly get publicity when actively
referred to them.
Just my 2 lurker-only cents, and thx for all your efforts
-- Markus
········@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Tilton wrote:
>> A dumb question is not an
>> aggravation, it is where noobs start and where we start to get to know a
>> noob. Spank them and send them off to a fifty-link page to study up
>> before daring to address We Special Ones and do not expect them to come
>> back.
>
> A fair point (two points, actually). But the question is not so much
> whether we would like to have such a thing as whether the noobs would
> like to have such a thing. When I'm about to post something list that I
> haven't been following for a while, I think that I would appreciate an
> abbreviated FAQ of the sort proposed. Are there any noobs in the house
> who would like to chime in on this?
Yes - a monthly automated reminder post containing a small selection of
references, to sites and threads, is a good idea. It works well on other
mail lists.
But less is more. Half a page of 10 or 15 or 20 links may do it.
No real need to update it too often at all.
Although the macro/function issue seems to turn up repeatedly.
The newbie-to-novice transition is one involving heaps of external
references and examples. So its the newbie you probably want to target this
at, where the novice is operating under their own steam after a while.
Perhaps JS would like to short-list some references or threads for us
novices to add to or comment on.
I am not sure of the distinction between a newbie and a novice, but
coming from a non-computer science background, I can assure you that I
qualify as the lesser of the two. I don't think that anyone should
assume that Jeff's intention is to put newcomers off. I spent a
delightful afternoon with him recently during which he put everything
else aside and gave me a personal tour of BioBike as well as an
introduction to LISP programming. I was expecting a brief discussion at
best, as I was a complete stranger who had expressed interest in his
work by Email. So, my experience with the personal interface between a
newcomer and LISP (from both Jeff and Peter Karp) has been very good.
That said, the online interface between LISP and a newcomer is
appalling. It seems that this has resulted from the community being
dispersed across a number of implementations, open source efforts that
are secondary to commercial implementations, less of an emphasis on
collaborative programming in LISP, most LISP programmers working on
commercial projects and few hobby LISPers. These are my impressions.
They may be incorrect. What I do know, is that when I go to the Python
site (http://www.python.org/about/gettingstarted/), there is a wealth
of resource material at all levels that is well presented and current.
In contrast, when I go to one of several LISP sites, the unifying
feature is that they are riddled with dead links and lack materials
that bridge the gap between playing with the language and beginning to
use it as a useful tool.
I love playing with LISP and found David Touretzky's book to be truly
enlightening. I have tried a number of implementations on my computer
and have found them enjoyable, even from the command line. I find Emacs
to be difficult, to say the least. I find useful code packages on the
web, but when I try to use them, I run up against ASDF which still
defeats me. I don't really need personal attention with this, but
rather online resources for newcomers. When a critical mass of
newcomers aggregates, we will be help each other and may not need to
request much help from experts. The time that I have available to work
on this stuff is limited and fragmented. I am certain that I would
frustrate anyone who tried to walk me through each step to get started.
I have wanted to do my programming with LISP, but ended up using
Python.
So, thank you very much for the effort. There is a real need for
current and accessible online resources. As a newcomer, I rather prefer
to try to work things out for myself if the resources are available.
One thing that is perhaps not needed however, is one more resource if
it ends up being poorly maintained or not widely used.
One last thing is that a few individuals seem to be a bit rude or
arrogant online. That does intimidate discussion by newcomers. Clearly
stating the appropriate etiquette for asking questions and supplying
useful links to relevant information is neither rude nor intimidating.
·······@uq.edu.au wrote:
> That said, the online interface between LISP and a newcomer is
> appalling. It seems that this has resulted from the community being
> dispersed across a number of implementations, open source efforts that
> are secondary to commercial implementations, less of an emphasis on
> collaborative programming in LISP, most LISP programmers working on
> commercial projects and few hobby LISPers. These are my impressions.
> They may be incorrect.
They are not, but they are not why Lisp is hard to approach.
> What I do know, is that when I go to the Python
> site (http://www.python.org/about/gettingstarted/), there is a wealth
> of resource material at all levels that is well presented and current.
Pythonistas are not very good programmers, they need that stuff. OK, I
will be nice: they, like you, only program as a side activity. (Which is
why you all are not so good at programming. There, I feel better.)
> In contrast, when I go to one of several LISP sites, the unifying
> feature is that they are riddled with dead links and lack materials
> that bridge the gap between playing with the language and beginning to
> use it as a useful tool.
Yes. Some Assembly Required. Batteries Not Included. Useable Development
Environment Left As An Exercise.
>
> I love playing with LISP ...
No, you do not, or you would still be using it. By definition.
>...and found David Touretzky's book
Cue Barbara.
> to be truly
> enlightening.
>I have tried a number of implementations on my computer
> and have found them enjoyable, even from the command line. I find Emacs
> to be difficult, to say the least.
Diagnosis confirmed: you are unworthy of Lisp. We put these obstacles up
to filter out people who do not get it. There is hope for you since you
are just a noob, but salvation will not come in this life. Only if you
program seriously for ten years and then in some subsequent life
discover a new language called Lisp will you appreciate it enough to
overcome the obstacles we erect.
Later we discover you consider Python and Lisp interchangeable. Yikes.
> I find useful code packages on the
> web, but when I try to use them, I run up against ASDF which still
> defeats me.
Bad API, not your fault.
> I don't really need personal attention with this, but
> rather online resources for newcomers.
No one else had them, what is your problem? Answer: insufficient
motivation deived from insufficient appreciation of the value of Lisp
derived from insufficient /years/ toiling with lesser languages.
> When a critical mass of
> newcomers aggregates, we will be help each other and may not need to
> request much help from experts.
I'm sorry. Have you read PCL? I did not think so.
> The time that I have available to work
> on this stuff is limited and fragmented. I am certain that I would
> frustrate anyone who tried to walk me through each step to get started.
> I have wanted to do my programming with LISP, but ended up using
> Python.
Are you also crawling around the campus on your hands and knees because
learning to walk was so diabolically hard? Got, fell down, got up, fell
down -- forget this!
No, everyone else was walking so you wanted to do the same. As one
motivated only by the herd instinct, Python is perfect for you.
>
> So, thank you very much for the effort. There is a real need for
> current and accessible online resources. As a newcomer, I rather prefer
> to try to work things out for myself if the resources are available.
> One thing that is perhaps not needed however, is one more resource if
> it ends up being poorly maintained or not widely used.
>
> One last thing is that a few individuals seem to be a bit rude or
> arrogant online.
<sob> I'm sorry! Please come back! </sob>
> That does intimidate discussion by newcomers.
Newcomers should be listening, not discussing. Questions should be
prefaced with prolonged bowing and scraping and general
self-flagellation and gifts. I respond well to myrrh. Afterwards, leave
the room without turning your back on any of the Lisp gods.
> Clearly
> stating the appropriate etiquette for asking questions and supplying
> useful links to relevant information is neither rude nor intimidating.
>
Only a troll pretends they do not know Usenet etiquette.
:)
kenny
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
Hi Ken,
It has certainly been interesting to make your acquaintance. After
posting my comments I saw that I had indeed broken one of the etiquette
rules ("as a newcomer, not lecture about faults with LISP"), but I can
assure you that I am new to this forum rather than a troll as you
suggest. My intention was to provide my perspective and frustrations as
a newcomer as Jeff's proposal was to be for the benefit of such people.
I have not abandoned LISP. I will gladly confess my ignorance and admit
to reading Touretsky's book (which it seems you dislike). I have made
it part way through the Paul Graham's book which you recommend and I am
actively working through a variety of tutorials.
Resorting to a different language (Python) to accomplish a task was a
practical matter. The decision relates to my current state of ignorance
rather than my intelligence. You misinterpreted the situation when you
assumed that I intended to abandon LISP altogether.
I cannot tell whether I have aggravated or amused you, but you seem to
have found it entertaining either way.
Paul
On Nov 29, 9:03 pm, "Paul" <·······@uq.edu.au> wrote:
> rules ("as a newcomer, not lecture about faults with LISP"), but I can
> assure you that I am new to this forum rather than a troll as you
> suggest. My intention was to provide my perspective and frustrations as
> a newcomer as Jeff's proposal was to be for the benefit of such people.
It seems to me that there are many newbies on this group. I'm one too
having sat listening to the discussions for a couple of months before
posting anything.
I can strongly recommend a mixture of PCL (to get you going), the
archives of c.l.l (to answer almost anything you'll need to ask in the
first few months) and the Hyperspec (for reference).
The one area I too have struggled with is libraries but resolving
library dependencies is always hard in any environment. I programmed
for years in C++ and resolving link errors is no fun there either!
Python has the advantages afforded by it's (almost) single
implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
map, reduce, etc. Taken on its own this only meant I needed to change
my code a little but looking at the bigger picture I felt a bit like I
was building on sand. What would be changed next? I'm sure many will
disagree with this viewpoint but via some other twists and turns it
lead me to Lisp so I'm quite happy about it.
The folks here seem more than happy to help if you truly have a
specific problem rather than a general criticism of the language to get
off your chest. I'm sure criticisms are fine too but you'd best be
really sure you know what you're talking about before posting :-)
Phil
···············@gmail.com writes:
> implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
> little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
> map, reduce, etc.
Is this really true?!
?!
On Nov 29, 9:57 pm, Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> wrote:
> ···············@gmail.com writes:
> > implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
> > little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
> > map, reduce, etc.Is this really true?!
>
> ?!
Enjoy:
http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=98196
···············@gmail.com wrote:
> On Nov 29, 9:57 pm, Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> wrote:
> > ···············@gmail.com writes:
> > > implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
> > > little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
> > > map, reduce, etc.Is this really true?!
> >
> > ?!
>
> Enjoy:
>
> http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=98196
I don't know Python, but I'm somewhat interested in its development.
Python3000 will still have lambda.
Guido has abandoned his crusade against it:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060415.html
On Nov 29, 11:12 pm, "Joel Wilsson" <············@gmail.com> wrote:
> Python3000 will still have lambda.
> Guido has abandoned his crusade against it:http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060415.html
Thanks for pointing out this updated info...although the back and forth
rather reinforces Ken's observations on maturity :-)
Phil
···············@gmail.com wrote:
> On Nov 29, 11:12 pm, "Joel Wilsson" <············@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Python3000 will still have lambda.
>>Guido has abandoned his crusade against it:http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060415.html
>
>
> Thanks for pointing out this updated info...although the back and forth
> rather reinforces Ken's observations on maturity :-)
"After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the
most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop
wasting everybody's talent and time on an impossible quest."
Funny, reads like a Road to Lisp entry. You don't think...nahhhhhh.
:)
kzo
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
Bill Atkins wrote:
> ···············@gmail.com writes:
>
>
>>implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
>>little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
>>map, reduce, etc.
>
>
> Is this really true?!
>
Don't worry, they have something better:
http://pycells.pdxcb.net/
kt
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:57:06 +0100, Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> wrote:
> ···············@gmail.com writes:
>
>> implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
>> little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
>> map, reduce, etc.
>
> Is this really true?!
>
> ?!
They got list comprehentions instead.
Don't worry. They are just as powerfull
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> wrote:
> ···············@gmail.com writes:
>> implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
>> little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
>> map, reduce, etc.
>
> Is this really true?!
No, it isn't. It was considered to remove map and filter because you
can do those operations with list comprehensions. However, the current
design documentation for Python 3 retains lambda (and does not rename
it, because no better name has been proposed) and considers moving map
and filter to a module, but certainly doesn't remove them.
--
Karl A. Krueger <········@example.edu> { s/example/whoi/ }
Karl A. Krueger wrote:
> Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> wrote:
> > ···············@gmail.com writes:
> >> implementation such as numerous useful libraries. But I lost interest a
> >> little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
> >> map, reduce, etc.
> >
> > Is this really true?!
>
> No, it isn't.
Yes, Joel already pointed this out 2 days ago.
I think the point had become more that the potential for instability
and tinkering with the language was not desirable to some of us. Maybe
we're irrational. Or maybe this is the futility of a language with
version numbers (or just the need to compete with Ruby)!
Phil
···············@gmail.com wrote:
>... But I lost interest a
> little in Python when I heard the next major release was losing lambda,
> map, reduce, etc. Taken on its own this only meant I needed to change
> my code a little but looking at the bigger picture I felt a bit like I
> was building on sand. What would be changed next? I'm sure many will
> disagree with this viewpoint...
Not me. When my guardian angel Dr. Jeffrey kane) tapped me on the
shoulder and turned me onto CL, I had just blown big bucks trying Stoney
Ballard's Component Workshop and QKS SmalltalkAgents (and, think to come
of it, an incipient Dylan) in my desperate search for A Better Way. He
of course reeled off a dozen fine qualities, but the one that sealed the
deal was one that might have left others cold: "mature". Yes!!!!
I am confused enough as it is, I do not need my tool to be confused, too.
> I'm sure criticisms are fine too but you'd best be
> really sure you know what you're talking about before posting :-)
Well, the hounds do need their exercise.
kzo
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
"Paul" <·······@uq.edu.au> writes:
> Hi Ken,
>
> It has certainly been interesting to make your acquaintance. After
> posting my comments I saw that I had indeed broken one of the etiquette
> rules ("as a newcomer, not lecture about faults with LISP"), but I can
Another etiquette rule: Lisp, not LISP. :)
LISP is the 1950's-era LISt Processor; Lisp is the modern language.
> I have not abandoned LISP. I will gladly confess my ignorance and admit
> to reading Touretsky's book (which it seems you dislike). I have made
I think Ken is alluding to a bizarre troll named Barbara with a
strange fixation on David Touretzky. See:
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=touretzky+author%3Abarbara&qt_s=Search
> it part way through the Paul Graham's book which you recommend and I am
> actively working through a variety of tutorials.
Well, put Graham down and go here: http://gigamonkeys.com/book/
>>>>> "BA" == Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> writes:
BA> Another etiquette rule: Lisp, not LISP. :)
BA> LISP is the 1950's-era LISt Processor; Lisp is the modern
BA> language.
And some of us wind up spelling it LISP^H^H^Hisp every time we type
it, because we imprinted on LISP at an early age.
Charlton
--
Charlton Wilbur
·······@chromatico.net
Paul wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> It has certainly been interesting to make your acquaintance. After
> posting my comments I saw that I had indeed broken one of the etiquette
> rules ("as a newcomer, not lecture about faults with LISP"), but I can
> assure you that I am new to this forum rather than a troll as you
> suggest.
What is this, modus whatsit or somethin? "All trolls profess ignorance
of rules of etiquette" does not entail that "all professors of 'rules of
etiquette need explication' are trolls."?
> My intention was to provide my perspective and frustrations as
> a newcomer as Jeff's proposal was to be for the benefit of such people.
>
>
> I have not abandoned LISP. I will gladly confess my ignorance and admit
> to reading Touretsky's book (which it seems you dislike).
You got /that/ from "Cue Barbara" (an inside
Usenet/Touretzky/Scientology joke)? There is hope for you.
> I have made
> it part way through the Paul Graham's book which you recommend and I am
> actively working through a variety of tutorials.
>
> Resorting to a different language (Python) to accomplish a task was a
> practical matter. The decision relates to my current state of ignorance
> rather than my intelligence. You misinterpreted the situation when you
> assumed that I intended to abandon LISP altogether.
Yeah, jeez, HTF I got that from "I have wanted to do my programming with
LISP, but ended up using Python" I will never know.
>
> I cannot tell whether I have aggravated or amused you, but you seem to
> have found it entertaining either way.
Your post was definitely a fat pitch for me to rally Lisp noobs
wondering if they should brave the ramparts which stopped you. yes, Lisp
is worth it. No, not even you, after mastering Lisp, will do anything to
help grease the skids for those who might follow. By the time you know
enough to do a better ASDF (or pitch in on mk:defsystem) you will be
having too much fun programming to want to waste your time fixing a
problem most noobs overcome in a week after about three questions on
comp.lang.lisp.
We live here. Every week we see noobs stumble in the door, trip over the
upturned rug, bang their heads on the same too-low hanging lamp, then
ease into Lisp pretty easily after being pointed to Lisp-aware editors,
Slime, PCL, etc etc, directed by living Lisp Gods, dynamic and
interactive, not some two-dimensional billboard of an FAQ that just
raises more questions.
I feel a Naggum coming on. You unlike most Lisp noobs "ended up using
Python", stopping on your way out the door to lecture us on the
importance of smooth carpetry when as always in life your experience
says more about you than us. Great skiers do not whine about the padding
on lift chairs and whether the slopes have been groomed today because
they have their skis strapped to their backpacks and are humping it up a
ravine for three hours to gain a thousand feet of vertical for a two
minute drop thru virgin powder you won't find back at the resort on
Betty's Promenade, prepared to dig their own asses out of any avalanche
they might start if they can still move their arms or even breathe. Not
sure the FAQ made that clear.
kzo
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
········@gmail.com wrote:
> Some groups (in Google) have a special omnipresent header message that
> tells newbies what to read before posting there. This is (I think) hard
> to do in general because that is (I think) specific to Google groups.
> But we could easily have a weekly reminder post with the subject NEW
> LISPERS PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING IN C.L.L. which would be a sort
> of abbreviated FAQ composed of pointers to existing conversations.
> Obvious examples include:
>
> * I'm a complete novice. Where do I begin? ...
>
> * Why there are so many parens? Or: I want to propose a new syntax with
> less parens! First, read this thread: ...
>
> * How are lisp, python, ruby, forth related? Read this thread: ...
>
> * I'm confused by there being so many imlpementations. Which one should
> I use? ...
>
> * Isn't Lisp slow? Read this thread: ...
>
> * I don't get macros! Read this thread: ...
>
> Even if a newbie manages to miss this weekly reminder, we could just
> point people to the latest such post instead of having to answer all
> these all the time.
>
> If y'all think that this is a good idea, I'll volunteer to collect up
> the pointers and be the weekly den mother.
I agree that this is a good idea, and I think you're a good candidate
for taking care of this. You have my vote. ;)
Pascal
--
My website: http://p-cos.net
Common Lisp Document Repository: http://cdr.eurolisp.org
Closer to MOP & ContextL: http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/
El Mon, 13 Nov 2006 19:47:55 +0100 , Pascal Costanza <··@p-cos.net>
escribió:
> ········@gmail.com wrote:
> > Some groups (in Google) have a special omnipresent header message
> > that tells newbies what to read before posting there. This is (I
> > think) hard to do in general because that is (I think) specific to
> > Google groups. But we could easily have a weekly reminder post with
> > the subject NEW LISPERS PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING IN C.L.L.
> > which would be a sort of abbreviated FAQ composed of pointers to
> > existing conversations. Obvious examples include:
> >
> > * I'm a complete novice. Where do I begin? ...
> >
> > * Why there are so many parens? Or: I want to propose a new syntax
> > with less parens! First, read this thread: ...
> >
> > * How are lisp, python, ruby, forth related? Read this thread: ...
> >
> > * I'm confused by there being so many imlpementations. Which one
> > should I use? ...
> >
> > * Isn't Lisp slow? Read this thread: ...
> >
> > * I don't get macros! Read this thread: ...
> >
> > Even if a newbie manages to miss this weekly reminder, we could just
> > point people to the latest such post instead of having to answer all
> > these all the time.
> >
> > If y'all think that this is a good idea, I'll volunteer to collect
> > up the pointers and be the weekly den mother.
>
> I agree that this is a good idea, and I think you're a good candidate
> for taking care of this. You have my vote. ;)
LMAO!! Pascal has shown us the power of professional brown
dispatching!! :DDDD
No offenses :)
·········@gmail.com" <········@gmail.com> writes:
> But we could easily have a weekly reminder post with the subject NEW
> LISPERS PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING IN C.L.L. which would be a sort
> of abbreviated FAQ composed of pointers to existing conversations.
[...]
> If y'all think that this is a good idea, I'll volunteer to collect up
> the pointers and be the weekly den mother.
It is indeed a good idea. You might want to review this prior art:
Common Lisp FAQ
http://www.cl-user.net/asp/web-sites/cl-faq
Common Lisp FAQ for comp.lang.lisp newsgroup
http://www.cl-user.net/asp/web-sites/cll-faq
FAQ
http://www.cliki.net/FAQ
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://wiki.alu.org/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
The Common Lisp Directory: http://www.cl-user.net
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> wrote:
+---------------
| It is indeed a good idea. You might want to review this prior art:
| Common Lisp FAQ
| http://www.cl-user.net/asp/web-sites/cl-faq
| Common Lisp FAQ for comp.lang.lisp newsgroup
| http://www.cl-user.net/asp/web-sites/cll-faq
| FAQ
| http://www.cliki.net/FAQ
+---------------
Are these [from your message of 2006-02-28] still under development?
Common Lisp FAQ
http://wiki.alu.org/Common_Lisp_FAQ
Staging Area for the Common Lisp FAQ
http://www.lispniks.com/faq/staging-faq.html
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
> Are these [from your message of 2006-02-28] still under development?
>
> Common Lisp FAQ
> http://wiki.alu.org/Common_Lisp_FAQ
>
> Staging Area for the Common Lisp FAQ
> http://www.lispniks.com/faq/staging-faq.html
This is unmaintained, see:
CL-FAQ maintainers and/or FAQ software suggestions wanted
http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/cl-faq/2006-November/000153.html
Re: Publicly releasing the CL FAQ: still a good idea
http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/cl-faq/2006-September/000146.html
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://wiki.alu.org/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
The Common Lisp Directory: http://www.cl-user.net
Part of the theory (if one can call it that) of my proposal was that
offline, static FAQs sucha as these are hard to maintain and constantly
get out of date, whereas cll is, like the web, a self-maintaining FAQ
by virtue of the dynamically updating discussion threads. My idea was
that by pointing to threads (and updating those pointers as new useful
threads arise) one can avoid having to copy things down into an FAQ.
Usually (although not always), the head message of a given thread is
the question, and the next message is a cogent response (thereafter
usually ensues a flamewar, also sometimes useful). So, whereas I honor
these previous works, what I am proposing is a somewhat different
experiment.
Paolo Amoroso wrote:
> ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
>
> > Are these [from your message of 2006-02-28] still under development?
> >
> > Common Lisp FAQ
> > http://wiki.alu.org/Common_Lisp_FAQ
> >
> > Staging Area for the Common Lisp FAQ
> > http://www.lispniks.com/faq/staging-faq.html
>
> This is unmaintained, see:
>
> CL-FAQ maintainers and/or FAQ software suggestions wanted
> http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/cl-faq/2006-November/000153.html
>
> Re: Publicly releasing the CL FAQ: still a good idea
> http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/cl-faq/2006-September/000146.html
>
>
> Paolo
> --
> Why Lisp? http://wiki.alu.org/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
> The Common Lisp Directory: http://www.cl-user.net
On 2006-11-14, ········@gmail.com <········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Part of the theory (if one can call it that) of my proposal was that
> offline, static FAQs sucha as these are hard to maintain and
> constantly get out of date, whereas cll is, like the web, a
> self-maintaining FAQ by virtue of the dynamically updating
> discussion threads. My idea was that by pointing to threads (and
> updating those pointers as new useful threads arise) one can avoid
> having to copy things down into an FAQ. Usually (although not
> always), the head message of a given thread is the question, and the
> next message is a cogent response (thereafter usually ensues a
> flamewar, also sometimes useful). So, whereas I honor these previous
> works, what I am proposing is a somewhat different experiment.
This is why I finally convinced myself that asking you if you wanted
to take over the Common Lisp FAQ mentioned below was not what you were
after.
-- L
p.s. sorry for pseudo-top-posting.
> Paolo Amoroso wrote:
>> ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
>>
>> > Are these [from your message of 2006-02-28] still under
>> > development?
>> >
>> > Common Lisp FAQ
>> > http://wiki.alu.org/Common_Lisp_FAQ
>> >
>> > Staging Area for the Common Lisp FAQ
>> > http://www.lispniks.com/faq/staging-faq.html
>>
>> This is unmaintained, see:
>>
>> CL-FAQ maintainers and/or FAQ software suggestions wanted
>> http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/cl-faq/2006-November/000153.html
>>
>> Re: Publicly releasing the CL FAQ: still a good idea
>> http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/cl-faq/2006-September/000146.html
On 4822 September 1993, ········@gmail.com wrote:
> Paolo Amoroso wrote:
>> CL-FAQ maintainers and/or FAQ software suggestions wanted
>> Re: Publicly releasing the CL FAQ: still a good idea
> Part of the theory (if one can call it that) of my proposal was that
> offline, static FAQs sucha as these are hard to maintain and constantly
> get out of date, whereas cll is, like the web, a self-maintaining FAQ
> by virtue of the dynamically updating discussion threads.
But just like the web the quality of the threads varies. Also, an FAQ
doesn't need to be 'offline' -- I remember the old cll faq getting
posted once a month, IIRC. An regularly maintained FAQ has the benefit
that it provides a common place in which one can find a lot of
information which do have answers (i.e., a FAQ isn't complete without
answers to those questions) where as threads may mainly contain
useless or even worse false information.
> My idea was that by pointing to threads (and updating those pointers
> as new useful threads arise) one can avoid having to copy things
> down into an FAQ.
The price, however, is that the one who maintains this pointer needs
to be aware of all threads content and also be competent enough to
decide whether a some reoccuring thread for some theme is "better" (in
whatever behalf) than the current pointer target. I think that this is
actually much more work than maintaining a FAQ.
Holger
--
--- http://hillview.bugwriter.net/ ---
"It seems to me you have become addicted to binaries. You should seek
help immediately. You should contact the nearest hacker and have him
dump your system full of tarballs for you to compile until your head
explodes." -- R. L. Kleeberger on debian-user
Holger Schauer wrote:
> > My idea was that by pointing to threads (and updating those pointers
> > as new useful threads arise) one can avoid having to copy things
> > down into an FAQ.
>
> The price, however, is that the one who maintains this pointer needs
> to be aware of all threads content and also be competent enough to
> decide whether a some reoccuring thread for some theme is "better" (in
> whatever behalf) than the current pointer target. I think that this is
> actually much more work than maintaining a FAQ.
No, the community needs to be aware etc. All the FAQ maintainer has to
do is to read the discussion in the thread related to the FAQ where the
community will thrash out in public what should be in the FAQ. For
further discussion please see the current Newbie FAQ thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_frm/thread/96f30f05560a06c7
[[
Is there some better way to refer to these ... TinyURL I guess...
Anything better than that? Can I put html anchors into this message?
I'll try:
<a
href=http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_frm/thread/96f30f05560a06c7
>test</a>
]]