null - Why did father of Clojure say that Scheme's true/false are broken?

Question

In this video, Rich Hickey introduced Clojure for Lisp programmers.

At time 01:10:42, he talked about nil/false/end-of-sequence/'() among Clojure/Common Lisp/Scheme/Java. He said: "Scheme has true and false, but they are broken."

I don't understand why he said that and why does he consider it's "broken"?

question from:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5830571/why-did-father-of-clojure-say-that-schemes-true-false-are-broken

Answer 1

It strikes me you'd rather see it from the horse's mouth, so here's a choice extract from a message Rich posted:

Scheme #t is almost completely meaningless, as Scheme conditionals test for #f/non-#f, not #f/#t. I don't think the value #f has much utility whatsoever, and basing conditionals on it means writing a lot of (if (not (null? x))... where (if x... will do in Clojure/CL, and a substantial reduction in expressive power when dealing with sequences, filters etc.

The links in that message are also worthwhile, though the second one may be a bit poetic.