Re: mathlib

[Sean Conner <sean@...>]

It was thus said that the Great Petite Abeille once stated:
> 
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 9:39 PM, Hisham <h@hisham.hm> wrote:
> 
> > Still, if I was told at gunpoint to "remove some functions from the
> > standard Lua library now!" the ones I'd certainly remove would be
> > math.pow and string.len. They are, after all, redundant (not
> > "redundant" in the sense that you can code it in terms of other
> > primitives (in that case why don't we remove `while` since it can now
> > be written in terms of `goto`), but "really redundant" in the sense
> > that there's already another function/operator that does the _exact
> > same thing_).
> 
> I personally favor aString:len() (or even string.len( aString ) ) over
> #aString every time. And I would rather have table.len( aTable ) than
> #aTable. Suffering from quite an aversion to obscure diacritical
> notations. But, eh, each to their own.

  So I take you would rather see

	(quote (a b c))

than

	'(a b c)

in Lisp?

> (And not specially looking forward to witness all these Klingon based
> hackery these bitwise operators are going to produce in earnest. Sigh.)

  Nah, that's what APL is for.

  -spc (Okay, I'll get off your lawn now ... )