6 ms·

> Surely if lisp makes a programmer N times more efficient then it would be easy to study scientifically. Have there been any studies comparing productivity? I

> Surely if lisp makes a programmer N times more efficient then it would be easy to study scientifically. Have there been any studies comparing productivity? I began to write a reply to your question, but decided that it deserved its own post: http://www.loper-os.org/?p=85 http://www.loper-os.org/?p=85

trapper 17y ago
I refer you to: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1016762 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1016762 What's wrong with that as evidence for lisps superiority?
- jules 17y ago
  What's wrong is that they measured the performance of Lisp programmers vs Java/C++ programmers. This is fine but you're not comparing the merits of the programming language. The Lisp programmers would win even if they were forced to program in Java.
plinkplonk 17y ago
"I began to write a reply to your question, but decided that it deserved its own post" That isn't really a reply to the question posed. Just more ranting and raving. Sample: "Yes, my dear bean counters, you can measure productivity. I would no more ask you to stop in your attempts at its measurement than I would ask mosquitoes to stop sucking blood. You can measure productivity – even of Lisp; even of political philosophies. You will simply need to secure a very large bag of beans – one deep enough to hold a bean for every twist and turn of a century of tinkering, politicking, and everything else associated with the messy business of successfully thinking new thoughts." The best interpretation of this drivel is that you want people to accept your claims of superior productivity just on your say so but not ask for any evidence because asking you back up your unsubstantiated claims of superiority would be "bean counting". Forget the scientific studies. There is another kind of "evidence" in programming - write code that is evidently superior. The best way to show that (say) Linux is an "inferior" operating system is to build one better. Not talk about making one sometime in the misty future. Build. Then talk. Endless rants aren't as good. As silentbicycle says elsewhere "I just take issue with how some particularly vocal Lispers have been sitting on the sidelines going, "Our language is THE BEST LANGUAGE" for decades. ("Sick of being a blub programmer and working in Blub? Try our Language For Smart People.") They're so used to being smug because their language was thirty years ahead of its time, fifty years ago."
- wendroid 17y ago
  > The best way to show that (say) Linux is an "inferior" operating system is to build one better. One of the most valued metrics of "better" is "how does it fit into the ecosystem". Plan 9 is clearly superior to Linux. It has cleaner interfaces, one person can understand it, lot's of things are unified that were disparate etc. etc. Everyone who uses both extensively berates Linux at every turn. Mention it in more general spaces as HN, Reddit, Slashdot etc. and you will be told it is a failure, flop, doesn't have program X so it's useless, etc. etc. Popularity means nothing http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html The previous winners of the "Language of the Year" award are shown below. Year Winner 2008 C 2007 Python 2006 Ruby 2005 Java 2004 PHP 2003 C++
  - plinkplonk 17y ago
    "Plan 9 is clearly superior to Linux. It has cleaner interfaces, one person can understand it, lot's of things are unified that were disparate etc. etc. " I have no argument with this, "Everyone who uses both extensively berates Linux at every turn." I seriously doubt this. Please provide any evidence you have. If the makers of plan 9 were to say "Linux is crap" at least they have the credibility to say so. It is noteworthy that they would never say something so stupid. Linux (and yes Plan 9) aren't the acme of perfection. But neither are the "lisp os" es. Raising ancient lisp systems to some unreachable pedestal of perfection , especially by people who've never seen or used on and have just read about them, is dubious This is just a blogger with lots of crummy blog posts and no code. At best he is incoherent and at worst deluded. To repeat my point was not that Linux is the best OS ever. But for me (or anyone else) to go around screaming that everything that is popular is all delusion is pointless (and strictly imo) shouldn't be paid any attention. "The previous winners of the "Language of the Year" award are shown below. Year Winner 2008 C 2007 Python 2006 Ruby 2005 Java 2004 PHP 2003 C++" And the point is? Most of them are fine languages and worthy of "langauge of the year" at least when measured in terms of popularity. "Popularity means nothing" Popularity is not everything but it sure isn't "nothing" either.
    - 17y ago

trapper 17y ago

I refer you to: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1016762 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1016762 What's wrong with that as evidence for lisps superiority?

jules 17y ago
What's wrong is that they measured the performance of Lisp programmers vs Java/C++ programmers. This is fine but you're not comparing the merits of the programming language. The Lisp programmers would win even if they were forced to program in Java.

plinkplonk 17y ago

"I began to write a reply to your question, but decided that it deserved its own post" That isn't really a reply to the question posed. Just more ranting and raving. Sample: "Yes, my dear bean counters, you can measure productivity. I would no more ask you to stop in your attempts at its measurement than I would ask mosquitoes to stop sucking blood. You can measure productivity – even of Lisp; even of political philosophies. You will simply need to secure a very large bag of beans – one deep enough to hold a bean for every twist and turn of a century of tinkering, politicking, and everything else associated with the messy business of successfully thinking new thoughts." The best interpretation of this drivel is that you want people to accept your claims of superior productivity just on your say so but not ask for any evidence because asking you back up your unsubstantiated claims of superiority would be "bean counting". Forget the scientific studies. There is another kind of "evidence" in programming - write code that is evidently superior. The best way to show that (say) Linux is an "inferior" operating system is to build one better. Not talk about making one sometime in the misty future. Build. Then talk. Endless rants aren't as good. As silentbicycle says elsewhere "I just take issue with how some particularly vocal Lispers have been sitting on the sidelines going, "Our language is THE BEST LANGUAGE" for decades. ("Sick of being a blub programmer and working in Blub? Try our Language For Smart People.") They're so used to being smug because their language was thirty years ahead of its time, fifty years ago."

wendroid 17y ago
> The best way to show that (say) Linux is an "inferior" operating system is to build one better. One of the most valued metrics of "better" is "how does it fit into the ecosystem". Plan 9 is clearly superior to Linux. It has cleaner interfaces, one person can understand it, lot's of things are unified that were disparate etc. etc. Everyone who uses both extensively berates Linux at every turn. Mention it in more general spaces as HN, Reddit, Slashdot etc. and you will be told it is a failure, flop, doesn't have program X so it's useless, etc. etc. Popularity means nothing http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html The previous winners of the "Language of the Year" award are shown below. Year Winner 2008 C 2007 Python 2006 Ruby 2005 Java 2004 PHP 2003 C++
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "Plan 9 is clearly superior to Linux. It has cleaner interfaces, one person can understand it, lot's of things are unified that were disparate etc. etc. " I have no argument with this, "Everyone who uses both extensively berates Linux at every turn." I seriously doubt this. Please provide any evidence you have. If the makers of plan 9 were to say "Linux is crap" at least they have the credibility to say so. It is noteworthy that they would never say something so stupid. Linux (and yes Plan 9) aren't the acme of perfection. But neither are the "lisp os" es. Raising ancient lisp systems to some unreachable pedestal of perfection , especially by people who've never seen or used on and have just read about them, is dubious This is just a blogger with lots of crummy blog posts and no code. At best he is incoherent and at worst deluded. To repeat my point was not that Linux is the best OS ever. But for me (or anyone else) to go around screaming that everything that is popular is all delusion is pointless (and strictly imo) shouldn't be paid any attention. "The previous winners of the "Language of the Year" award are shown below. Year Winner 2008 C 2007 Python 2006 Ruby 2005 Java 2004 PHP 2003 C++" And the point is? Most of them are fine languages and worthy of "langauge of the year" at least when measured in terms of popularity. "Popularity means nothing" Popularity is not everything but it sure isn't "nothing" either.
  - 17y ago