[C++] delete considered harmful

The unbridled use of the delete statement has as an immediate consequence that it becomes terribly hard to find a meaningful set of coordinates in which to describe the process progress. ... The delete statement as it stands is just too primitive, it is too much an invitation to make a mess of one's program.

Never use delete, use smart pointers, memory pools, stack allocations. Don't break RAII.

>>71

There being values other than plain lists and atoms does not imply un-homoiconicity (which I believe is the term you were looking for).

Actually I've stated in >>54 that Clojure is homoiconic. Because it is.

the square brackets don't remove homoiconicity. They just add convenience.

To the contrary, they add inconvenience. Which is more convenient, (let (x 5) ...) or (let (vector x 5) ...)? To me it is obvious that the former. Why add a layer of indirection to heavily used core forms' syntax? You cannot car a [a b c], and the menagerie of various bracket types is harder to read too. Clojure syntax is inhomogenous, by which I mean that there is more than 1 way to combine atoms together, and what's worse, the different ways are not equivalent. This makes it much harder to work with that syntax.