编程与软件工程dreamsongs.com
Lisp 与写作的艺术（2003）
The Art of Lisp and Writing (2003)
2010 — 2025，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是 Lisp 社区老将 Richard P. Gabriel 的一篇随笔，围绕 Lisp 与写作展开，谈编程语言、社区变迁以及科学/工程观念的更替。文中回忆 Lisp 相关期刊和会议改名、Lisp 地位下降带来的失落，也穿插优化格言、桥梁振动、科学理论兴衰等例子。
为什么经久不衰：它把 Lisp 的技术文化、个人记忆和跨领域反思写在一起，既有圈内人的失落，也留下关于语言生态、正确性与观念更替的讨论，因此多年后仍值得读。
HN 评论精选
赞赏文风，但认为作者对期刊/会议改名抱怨像酸葡萄，改名只是扩大范围而非删除 Lisp。
我喜欢这篇文章的写作风格和声音。我不同意其中一些论断，但阅读过程很享受，这在大多数技术随笔中不常见。不过我要说，这一段感觉像酸葡萄：我们创办的期刊 LASC 改名 HOSC，我主要的会议 L&FP 改名 ICFP；我沮丧有两个原因，一是 1980 年代我们 Lisp 人帮功能编程研究者维持 L&FP，后来 Lisp 衰落时他们关上了门，二是这似乎意味着我的研究领域被学术界删除了。改变的只是 Lisp 不再居首；两个名称都允许其他语言和媒介贡献。Common Lisp 是好语言，但不是最终语言甚至最终“编程媒介”，假装它是会人为限制 Common Lisp 用户和未来语言设计者。当然，也许改名确实意味着 Lisp 被排除在期刊和会议之外，那上述说法就不成立，但我没做研究。
NoahTheDuke查看英文原文
I like the writing style and voice in this essay. I disagree with some of the assertions but I enjoyed my time reading, which doesn’t happen a lot with most tech-related essays. I will say, however, that this paragraph felt like sour grapes: > As examples, the scientific journal Guy Steele and I founded called Lisp and Symbolic Computation (LASC) had been renamed Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation (HOSC), and my primary scientific conference called Lisp and Functional Programming (L&FP) had been renamed the International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP). I was discouraged for two reasons. One was that during the 1980s when functional programming researchers had few outlets, many of us Lispers kept the lights on at L&FP for them, and later when Lisp was on the decline, they shut the door. And the other is that this seemed to signal that my field of inquiry had been deleted by the academy. All that’s changed is that Lisp isn’t primary anymore; they are both titled to allow other languages and other media to contribute to their respective focuses. Common Lisp is a good language but it’s not the final language nor even the final “programming medium”, so acting like it is artificially limits both Common Lisp users and future language designers who could all benefit from that cross-pollination. Now maybe the change of names is shorthand for lisp actually being excluded from the journal and conference, which nullifies the above, but without doing any research at all lol, I doubt it.
指出文中 Hoare's Dictum 的归属可能错误，所引资料认为应归给 Knuth。
更有趣的是，这根本不清楚是 Hoare 的。[0] 有很好的概述，他们得出结论，它确实是 Knuth 的。
martinhath查看英文原文
> Interestingly, the results of this optimization are well-described by Hoare's Dictum, often mistakenly attributed to Donald Knuth, which states More interestingly, it is not clear at all that it's Hoares. [0] has a nice overview, and they conclude that it is indeed Knuths. [0]: https://shreevatsa.wordpress.com/2008/05/16/premature-optimization-is-the-root-of-all-evil/
用军队过桥不齐步走的旧知识讽刺“第一次”说法，认为人类反复犯同样错误。
“然而这是第一座桥表现出这种行人激发横向运动。”第一次？看来我们注定每一代都重复同样的错误。军官早就命令部队过桥时不要齐步走。
lebuffon查看英文原文
"However this was the first time a bridge had displayed this type of pedestrian excited lateral motion." The first time? It seems we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes in every generation. Army officers have ordered troops to stop marching in step when going over bridges for a long time. :) https://www.livescience.com/34608-break-stride-frequency-of-vibration.html
认为文中对科学理论更替的悲观论调常见，但阿西莫夫已有反驳。
“科学家也许因为追求准确和精确，在确定宇宙真理方面运气最差。科学哲学和历史学者指出并推测科学理论如何来去——通过 refinement、革命，甚至无政府状态。”这种看法很常见，阿西莫夫写过一篇反驳。
aidenn0查看英文原文
> Scientists, though, perhaps because of their desire for accuracy and precision have had the worst luck of all in pinning down the truth of the universe. Philosophers and historians of science have pointed out and speculated on how scientific theories come and go—through refinement, through revolution, or even through anarchy. This sentiment is common enough that Asimov wrote a refutation of it: https://hermiene.net/essays-trans/relativity_of_wrong.html
历次讨论
同类还值得读
开源应用架构
The Architecture of Open Source Applications
《开源软件架构》（AOSA）是一本在线免费书，邀请知名开源项目的作者亲自剖析其内部设计，涵盖 SQLAlchemy、LLVM、Audacity、Apache、Bash 等系统。
编程与软件工程上首页 9 次 · 2011–2024aosabook.org编辑精选编程语言简史：简短、不完整且多半错误
A Brief, Incomplete, and Mostly Wrong History of Programming Languages
一篇以戏谑、故意不准确的方式回顾编程语言史的博客文章，用夸张轶事和讽刺定义串起 Lisp、C、C++、Java、JavaScript、PHP 等语言。
编程与软件工程上首页 8 次 · 2009–2021james-iry.blogspot.comSQLite 是如何测试的
How SQLite is tested
SQLite 官方文档页，系统介绍 SQLite 的测试体系：多种测试方法（TCL 测试、模糊测试、回归测试、静态分析等）和海量测试用例，展示了这个小型开源项目如何靠极致测试获得…
编程与软件工程上首页 8 次 · 2009–2025sqlite.org编辑精选高级编程语言（2009）
Advanced programming languages (2009)
Matt Might 的经典文章，按用途推荐“高级编程语言”：如果追求就业就选主流语言，如果追求表达力、学术研究或创业，则推荐 Haskell、OCaml、Scala 等函数式语…
编程与软件工程上首页 8 次 · 2009–2022matt.might.net我的 Forth 与栈机器经历
Yosefk - My history with Forth & stack machines
作者以亲身经历回顾了使用 Forth 语言和栈式机器的历程：既赞叹其简洁优雅、代码量小、可自举的优点，也坦率指出栈操作在实际编程中的痛苦，以及 Forth 社区文化中的问题。
编程与软件工程上首页 8 次 · 2010–2024yosefk.com编辑精选