Re: RE: succinctness = power

[Matthias Felleisen <address@hidden>]

The pattern community is even coming around to espouse the
linguistic view. At a workshop last December on the very
topic, John Vlissides slowly but surely started to see the 
value of rigorous formulations and, on the last day of the 
workshop, even proposed to do some research along those lines. 

Otherwise Shriram is head-on. Patternistas :) do what Paul does. 
They just don't understand the role of macros, but some will!

-- Matthias


At Sun, 26 May 2002 17:04:29 -0400 (EDT), Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> Paul Graham wrote:
> 
> > At least, it would seem to be a better plan than the 
> > opposite approach of enshrining "design patterns".
> 
> To be fair, design patterns arose from exactly the kind of
> archeological expedition you recommend.  That they have in some
> circles stultified is a fault of their proponents rather than the idea
> itself.  Perhaps their biggest weakness is that their initial
> proponents did not demand linguistic mechanisms that would help
> programmers integrate patterns into programs.
> 
> On the other hand, Erich Gamma promised me a beer and an explanation
> for why such a linguistic encapsulation would be a bad idea.  I
> haven't had a chance to collect, but I imagine the argument might be
> that it would inhibit further discovery.  However, I think the Lisp
> experience suggests contrariwise.
> 
> Shriram