Ideas & society2008 · shared on Hacker News
Wadler's critique of SICP (1987)
Research PDF · needs verificationExplore Wadler's critique of SICP (1987), its original source and Hacker News discussions. Discover community perspectives and save it to your reading list.
GO BEYOND THE ABSTRACT
The conversation around the idea.
Original Hacker News threads. Different perspectives, questions, and things worth thinking about.
Showing up to 100 related threads. A paper may appear in a comment rather than the original submission.
Links found in the discussion
Up to 50 recent source links, in HN item order.
Yrobschia ·
Ask HN: What language-agnostic programming books should I read?
927 points337 comments
Ytosh ·
A Year in Clojure
313 points156 comments
Ywskinner ·
Why SICP Matters
312 points127 comments
Ybwidlar ·
Racket v8.5
201 points85 comments
Ymomo-reina ·
Do I Really Need a Programming Language?
150 points142 comments
Ypluies ·
So you want to do the SICP...
100 points33 comments
Ytjalfi ·
Miranda: A non-strict functional language with polymorphic types (1985) [pdf]
95 points37 comments
Ypuredanger ·
Wadler's critique of SICP (1987)
80 points50 comments
Ypsibi ·
Hello Haskell, Goodbye Lisp (2009)
74 points68 comments
Ytosh ·
Why calculating is better than scheming (1987) [pdf]
65 points24 comments
Yprog ·
A critical view of SICP and rationale for HtDP
48 points10 comments
Ysampo ·
Evidence-based programming language design (PhD thesis)
47 points15 comments
Ynadim ·
Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
43 points26 comments
Yjosh-sematic ·
(Learn 'Scheme)
22 points2 comments
Ydrm237 ·
Production Languages and Toy Languages
15 points33 comments
Yeru ·
Why calculating is better than scheming (by Philip Wadler)
6 points0 comments
Yustad ·
Why Calculating is better than Scheming [pdf]
4 points1 comments
Ytinyspacewizard ·
Why calculating is better than scheming (1987) [pdf]
3 points1 comments
YJtsummers ·
Why Calculating is Better than Scheming (1987) [pdf]
2 points0 comments
Ysilcoon ·
A Road to Lisp: Why Lisp
2 points0 comments