General talk about software patterns

["Mike Beedle" <beedlem AT e-architects.com>]

Pascal writes:
> No programming language is really ideal for each and every problem, 
> therefore providing a framework of languages that you can use to tailor 
> your own language is, to my mind, clearly the better alternative. This 
> is more or less exactly what Lisp provides (among other things).

Pascal:

This is one of the things that I really like about Lisp:

        It is a programmable programming language.
        (paraphrasing Foderaro)

As just about everyone that has programmed in Lisp has experienced, it is
*easy* to write extensions or modify the language.  The extensions I use
are:
        * logical programming (through Lisa)
                > imagine "rules" everywhere interacting with functions,
                > classes, objects, etc.
        * abstract algebras, (Lambda Tensor, Maxima, my own little
          Macros, etc.)
                > macros that generate algebras, where Lisp expressions
                > are manipulated as abstract algebra expressions
        * pattern-oriented programming (my own little macros)
                > capture patterns in code

And this is also why I like Emacs:

        You don't have to like Emacs to like Emacs. 
        (Stallman ?)
        
Because you can program it any way you want it to work.

Anyhow, just to circle back again, this is why it is easy to write
pattern-oriented code in Lisp i.e. to program through the instantiation of
patterns.

- Mike