is there a Common Lisp equivalent to being "Pythonic" with Python? Meaning there is a single preferred method for accomplishing a task in most cases. I'm new to CL, writing out classes for common objects I'll have to work with but wondering if I'm too stuck in my ways and leveraging CLOS too much when I should be attempting to write things out as functions.
>>61539280
I don't know about any kind of official style guide, but if you read enough CL books, then you'll get a good idea of how to do things. Maybe read through some CL programs on GitHub and see how people do things in the wild, too.
>>61539402
I've been reading through practical common lisp as well as looking at a few github projects to familiarize myself with asdf. Seems like the culuture is as lot more 'just do it your way' which I guess I'll grow to like
>>61539506
Lisp does not enforce a style. In Lisp anything goes.
that's the point of lisp. it's not for pajeets who would otherwise just be using Microshaft Excel to edit CSV documents
>>61539506
fan of this book
https://www.amazon.com/Accessible-Introduction-Common-Functional-Programming-ebook/dp/B014T4WKJG/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1500909972&sr=8-8&keywords=common+lisp
>>61539550
I can appreciate that. I guess my worry is that i'll be employing anti-patterns in my code without even realizing it. For example I spent a bunch of time writing methods for classes instead of generic functions already because i've got __init__ still in the back of my head.
>>61539594
hey thank you, always looking for more material.