3 ms·

>It's almost a Lisp, but one that has the libraries and installed base that it can be used for production work. >e.g. it's easy to add your own control structu

>It's almost a Lisp, but one that has the libraries and installed base that it can be used for production work. >e.g. it's easy to add your own control structures to the language Huh? You obviously don't know Lisp. Between PLT Scheme and Common Lisp you have several metric tons of libraries. And Common Lisp is certainly used for serious production work. And finally, Lisp like freaking invented adding your own control structures to the language.

gaius 17y ago
Yes, 50 years ago Lisp was 30 years ahead of everyone else. Things have moved on, tho'.
- swannodette 17y ago
  I've used more than few languages professionally or academically (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, JavaScript, Python, Scheme) and it still seems to me that most languages are still trying to catch up. This isn't to say I don't enjoy these languages. But to say that things have moved past Lisp, that's laughable really. I mean, I don't even have garbage collection on my iPhone (and I really dig Objective-C).
  - gaius 17y ago
    It's not just the language, it's the ecosystem and community around it.
  - davidw 17y ago
    One thing that Tcl, Perl, Python, Ruby, et al have going for them is that they are "promiscuous" in that they tend to play well with C, and other systems. Lisp and Smalltalk are capable of doing that, of course, but there seems to be much more of a culture of "turtles, all the way down", where that sort of happy-go-lucky interaction with the rest of the world is not always looked upon positively.
    - prodigal_erik 17y ago
      C and its "undefined behavior" are behind most of the litany of security disasters and unstable apps we have all endured. It can be expedient to reuse C code, but in the long run we're better off replacing it with something more reliable.
      - silentbicycle 17y ago
        The uncomfortable trade-offs involved in working with what's available vs. replacing the whole stack with something done right are the heart of the "worse is better" paper. For better or worse, if you want to replace C, you have to dig deep.

gaius 17y ago

Yes, 50 years ago Lisp was 30 years ahead of everyone else. Things have moved on, tho'.

swannodette 17y ago
I've used more than few languages professionally or academically (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, JavaScript, Python, Scheme) and it still seems to me that most languages are still trying to catch up. This isn't to say I don't enjoy these languages. But to say that things have moved past Lisp, that's laughable really. I mean, I don't even have garbage collection on my iPhone (and I really dig Objective-C).
- gaius 17y ago
  It's not just the language, it's the ecosystem and community around it.
- davidw 17y ago
  One thing that Tcl, Perl, Python, Ruby, et al have going for them is that they are "promiscuous" in that they tend to play well with C, and other systems. Lisp and Smalltalk are capable of doing that, of course, but there seems to be much more of a culture of "turtles, all the way down", where that sort of happy-go-lucky interaction with the rest of the world is not always looked upon positively.
  - prodigal_erik 17y ago
    C and its "undefined behavior" are behind most of the litany of security disasters and unstable apps we have all endured. It can be expedient to reuse C code, but in the long run we're better off replacing it with something more reliable.
    - silentbicycle 17y ago
      The uncomfortable trade-offs involved in working with what's available vs. replacing the whole stack with something done right are the heart of the "worse is better" paper. For better or worse, if you want to replace C, you have to dig deep.