Xah Lee
2009-02-26 23:40:53 UTC
Is there anything really important to loose if you use only lexical
scope such as in scheme.
There is something important lost if the programming language only supportsscope such as in scheme.
lexical scope.
You don't lose anything by only using lexical scope, if lexical scope solves
your problem, and lends an adequate expressiveness to your solution.
Dynamic scope gives us an alternate way to invisibly pass an indefinite number
of parameters to a function
i do wonder, if any reputable computer scientist would blub out such
idiotic things as this thread's lispers have been.
Let me give a lucid account on the gist of dynamic scope and lexical
scope.
Dynamic scope, is when computers are still slow (1960s, 1970s),
there's no such thing as so-called “computer science” yet, and
mathematicians at the time have little idea what they are doing on the
computers.
When after a few decades, mathematicians got some whiff of the math of
computer languages, lexical was born. But by this time, mathematicians
have gone. What's left are so called computer scientist, typically
morons.
From a mathematical and practical perspective, everything about
dynamic scope is just global vars. Like closure, there's nothing
useful these things add from practical software developement
perspective.
Xah
∑ http://xahlee.org/
☄