4 ms·
It's a worthwhile question. I'm a huuuuuuuge supporter of the current design though! This conversation came up on the guile-devel list, and I gave my response
by paroneayea 11y ago
It's a worthwhile question. I'm a huuuuuuuge supporter of the current design though! This conversation came up on the guile-devel list, and I gave my response there too: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2015-09/msg00017.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2015-09/msg00...
Basically, I think that Lisp and Scheme have a reputation for being unapproachable. This reputation partly comes from how we structure our communities, who we reach out to, and etc. But it also depends on how we message ourselves.
There's a very conscious decision in the new design to make things look playful and inviting, to encourage experimentation. I think that's super important. It seems like it's having some effect on encouraging people to become engaged, and it certainly doesn't seem to be doing any harm to those who are already into hacking parentheses. :)
- yarrel 11y agoAgreed. It's very inviting.
- derefr 11y ago> Basically, I think that Lisp and Scheme have a reputation for being unapproachable. I don't think Lisp itself has that problem any more. Everyone knows that Clojure exists and is an approachable Lisp. The question has now become, "why should I pay attention to any Lisp that's not Clojure?"
- pjmlp 11y agoFrom the point of view of commercial ones: - Compilation to native code AOT - Tooling - Performance (CL has value types and way better ways to go downlevel, if needed)